Remedy Asia Ltd v. Yick Shing Contractors Ltd

Read the full judgment text of HCCT 4/2012 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 18 November 2014 before Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers.

Construction and arbitration proceedings – Application for leave to appeal dismissed – Court found no reasonable prospects of success in the intended appeal against decision of 16 October 2014 – Issue estoppel applies where parties and issues are identical – Costs ordered against defendant with statement of costs to be filed by plaintiff – Application was heard in open court on 18 November 2014 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.

Legal issues: Issue estoppel in appeal application

Outcome: Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCCT 4/2012
Court
高等法院原訟法庭
Date18 Nov 2014
JudgeHon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCCT 4/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTRUCTION AND ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

NO 4 OF 2012

____________

BETWEEN

  REMEDY ASIA LIMITED Plaintiff

and

  YICK SHING CONTRACTORS LIMITED Defendant

____________

Before: Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers (Open to public)
Date of Hearing: 18 November 2014
Date of Decision: 18 November 2014

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1.I thank counsel for their submissions, but having heard counsel I am not satisfied that there are reasonable prospects of success in the intended appeal against my decision of 16 October which adequately sets out my reasons. The arguments raised by the defendant were rejected and there is no need to repeat them. I consider that there is identity of parties and identifiable issues for issue estoppel to apply.

2.The application for leave to appeal is therefore dismissed with costs.  The assessment will be dealt with on paper and the plaintiff is to file its statement of costs within 14 days in accordance with the Practice Direction.

(Mimmie Chan)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Mr Ian Pennicott SC, instructed by Cheung & Lee, for the plaintiff

Mr Timothy Parker, instructed by Massie & Clement, for the defendant