Chung Fu Cheung v. Hau Hon Shek
|
HCMP 1706/2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 1706 OF 2014 ___________________ BETWEEN
___________________ Before: Hon Anthony Chan J in Chambers Date of Hearing: 25 July 2014 Date of Decision: 25 July 2014 ________________ D E C I S I O N ________________ 1.There is an interesting development this morning. I have been informed by Mr Cheung, who appears for the plaintiff, that an appeal has been filed by the plaintiff against the order of Deputy High Court Judge Yau dated 14 July 2014 (“Order”) on the basis that the learned Deputy Judge was wrong to have granted the Order against the defendant as opposed to the Bailiff. The reason being that the Bailiff does not act as the defendant’s agent in the execution of the writs of possession in question. That is consistent with the commentary at rubric 45/1/11 of Hong Kong Civil Procedure 2014, volume 1. It is indeed common ground between the parties that the Order has been granted against the wrong party. 2.However, the plaintiff seeks to persuade this court to continue with the Order for fear that the Bailiff would enforce the writs prior to the resolution of the appeal. 3.I am unable to agree that an inappropriate order should be continued by the court. Further, the plaintiff accepts that an injunction may be obtained from the Court of Appeal pending the resolution of the appeal where the circumstances so justify. 4.In the premises, whilst I have some sympathy for the plaintiff for the position in which he finds himself, I must discharge this injunction. 5.Costs of this application be to the defendant to be assessed summarily as follows:
Mr Lincoln Cheung, instructed by Tung, Ng, Tse & Heung, for the plaintiff Mr Jose d’Almada Remedios, instructed by John Ip & Co, for the defendant |