Go Wireless Ltd and Others v. Simeray Jannick Facques and Others

HCA 1480/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1480 OF 2010

____________

BETWEEN

Before: Hon L Chan J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 10 September 2012

Date of Judgment: 10 September 2012

___________________

J U D G M E N T

__________________

1.The 1st defendant, Mr Simeray, has repeatedly failed to follow the timetable for preparing this case for trial. His failure had led to various revisions of the timetable. I eventually made an unless order for discovery and inspection on 27 July 2012.

2.Part B(1) of the order required him to provide clearly indexed, paginated and identifiable copies of all documents on his list of documents to the plaintiffs, in hard copy form, by hand or by registered post, to reach the plaintiffs’ solicitors office, F Zimmern & Co, at Suite 1501-1503, 15th Floor, The Landmark, 15 Queen’s Road Central, Hong Kong, on or before 4 pm on the 14th day from the service upon him by email of this order. 

3.This order was served on him on 1 August 2012. He failed to comply with part B(1) of the order as cited because his documents did not reach the office of F Zimmern & Co and the position was still the same this morning. 

4.Mr Simeray, this morning, produced an affirmation saying that his ex-wife had, on 7 August 2012, posted the documents for him, by registered post, from France to F Zimmern & Co in Hong Kong.  Since the documents have not reached the office of F Zimmern & Co by the due date as provided in the order, he has therefore not complied with the unless order.  He has also not applied for any variation or extension of time for compliance with the order.  He has also not applied for any relief from sanction under Order 2 rule 4 of the Rules of the High Court, despite the same rule has been mentioned in a letter from the court to him dated 24 August 2012. 

5.Since the 1st defendant, Mr Simeray, has not complied with the unless order, the relief in the unless order will have to take effect.  I therefore declare that Mr Simeray’s re-re-amended defence and counterclaim has been struck out and judgment is entered for the plaintiffs against Mr Simeray for the relief prayed in the amended statement of claim, with damages to be assessed. 

6.Costs of this application and this action be paid by Mr Simeray to the plaintiffs, save as otherwise ordered.

(Submission on costs)

7.All interlocutory applications which are pending are dismissed automatically.  All costs reserved, save those in the pending interlocutory applications, be paid by the 1st defendant to the plaintiffs to be assessed.  The costs of the pending interlocutory applications are reserved and will be dealt with upon application being made.

Mr Christopher Chain, instructed by Messrs F Zimmern & Co., for the 1st to 4th plaintiffs (by Original Action) and the 2nd and 3rd defendants (by Counterclaim)

The 1st defendant (by Original Action) and the plaintiff (by Counterclaim) appeared in person