Sun Legend Investments Ltd v. Ho Yuk Wah David and Others

Read the full judgment text of CACV 242/2009 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 19 November 2010.

1. On this application, this Court gives leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under section 22(1)(a) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 494.

Cited by 3 cases · Cites 1 case

Case No.CACV 242/2009
Court
Court of Appeal
Date19 Nov 2010
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACV 242/2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 242 OF 2009

(ON APPEAL FROM HCA NOS. 1212 & 2915 OF 2002)

________________________

HCA 1212/2002

BETWEEN

  SUN LEGEND INVESTMENTS LIMITED Plaintiff
  and  
  HO YUK WAH DAVID 1st Defendant
  HO YUK KUEN JADE 2nd Defendant
  CHAN MAN HO BRIAN 3rd Defendant
  DAVID Y W HO & COMPANY (a firm) 4th Defendant
  (By Original Action)  
  --------------------------------  
AND BETWEEN    
  HO YUK WAH DAVID 1st Plaintiff
  HO YUK KUEN JADE 2nd Plaintiff
  CHAN MAN HO BRIAN 3rd Plaintiff
  DAVID Y W HO & COMPANY (a firm) 4th Plaintiff
  and  
  SUN LEGEND INVESTMENTS LIMITED 1st Defendant
  NEW WORLD DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. 2nd Defendant
  (By Counterclaim)  
  --------------------------------
 

    HCA 2915/2002
AND BETWEEN    
  BEIJING CHONGWEN-NEW WORLD  
  PROPERTIES DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED 1st Plaintiff
  CHINA NEW WORLD ELECTRONICS  
  LIMITED 2nd Plaintiff
  and  
  HO YUK WAH DAVID 1st Defendant
  HO YUK KUEN JADE 2nd Defendant
  CHAN MAN HO BRIAN 3rd Defendant
  DAVID Y W HO & COMPANY (a firm) 4th Defendant
  (By Original Action)  
  --------------------------------  
AND BETWEEN    
  HO YUK WAH DAVID 1st Plaintiff
  HO YUK KUEN JADE 2nd Plaintiff
  CHAN MAN HO BRIAN 3rd Plaintiff
  DAVID Y W HO & COMPANY (a firm) 4th Plaintiff
  and  
  BEIJING CHONGWEN-NEW WORLD  
  PROPERTIES DEVELOPMENT COMPANY  
  LIMITED 1st Defendant
  CHINA NEW WORLD ELECTRONICS  
  LIMITED 2nd Defendant
  NEW WORLD DEVELOPMENT  
  CO. LTD. 3rd Defendant
  (By Counterclaim)  
  --------------------------------  
(Consolidated by the Order of Master Woolley dated 31 October 2003)

Before: Hon Rogers VP, Le Pichon and Kwan JJA in Court

Date of Hearing: 19 November 2010

Date of Judgment: 19 November 2010

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Rogers VP:

1.On this application, this Court gives leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under section 22(1)(a) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 494.

2.We order security for costs in respect of the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs by counterclaim.  That will be in the sum of $400,000 each, which is the normal amount.

3.An application has been made for stay of this Court’s judgment.  This Court does not consider it appropriate to grant a stay.  

4.The primary basis upon which that application was made was on the basis that this Court should have given judgment in favour of the 1st, 2nd and 4th Plaintiffs on a different footing, but that matter was not argued before this Court.  Although Mr Wong has valiantly tried to argue that it was contained in the skeleton argument, in our view, it was not. The point that was argued before us today was a new point and it must be left to the Court of Final Appeal to decide whether they are prepared to entertain an argument that was not put before this Court.

(Anthony Rogers)
Vice-President
(Doreen Le Pichon)
Justice of Appeal
(Susan Kwan)
Justice of Appeal

Mr Jason Pow SC and Mr Samuel Wong, instructed by Messrs Li, Wong, Lam & W I Cheung, for the Plaintiff (by Original Action) and the 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim) in HCA1212/2002 and the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs (by Original Action) and the 1st and 2nd Defendants (by Counterclaim) in HCA2915/2002/Respondents

Mr Ronny Wong SC and Mr Patrick Szeto, instructed by Messrs Wilkinson & Grist, for the 1st, 2nd and 4th Defendants (by Original Action) and the 1st, 2nd and 4th Plaintiffs (by Counterclaim)/Applicants

Chan Man Ho Brian the 3rd Defendant (by Original Action) and the 3rd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)/Applicant, in person

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under CACV 242/2009