Case Details

Citation

TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS, FAMV 51/2009

Case Number

FAMV 51/2009

Court

Court of Final Appeal

(CFA)

Decision Date

26 February 2010

Parties

Applicant(s):

TAM SHUK YIN ANNY, FUNG LAI MEI BETTY

Respondent(s):

CHOI KWOK CHAN, ACTIVE TEAM INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, ADVANCE WISE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED, WISE APEX ENTERPRISES LIMITED, RICHMOND PROPERTIES AND TRADING COMPANY LIMITED

For Applicant(s):

Mr Edward Chan, SC, Mr Dennis Law & Mr Lawrence Cheung (instructed by Messrs Howell & Co)

For Respondent(s):

Mr Anthony Neoh, SC and Mr Jeremy Bartlett (instructed by Messrs J. Chan, Yip, So & Partners)

TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS

FAMV 51/2009

Court of Final Appeal26 February 2010

FAMV000051/2009 TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS

FAMV No. 51 of 2009

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 51 OF 2009 (CIVIL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM CACV NO. 105 OF 2008)

----------------------

Between
	TAM SHUK YIN ANNY	Petitioner (Respondent)
	and
	CHOI KWOK CHAN	1^stRespondent (1^st Applicant)
	FUNG LAI MEI BETTY	2^ndRespondent (2^nd Applicant)
	ACTIVE TEAM INTERNATIONAL LIMITED	3^rdRespondent
	ADVANCE WISE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED	4^thRespondent
	WISE APEX ENTERPRISES LIMITED	5^thRespondent
	RICHMOND PROPERTIES AND TRADING COMPANY LIMITED	6^thRespondent

----------------------

Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ

Date of Hearing: 26 February 2010

Date of Determination: 26 February 2010

---------------------------------------

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

----------------------------------------

Mr Justice Chan PJ:

1. The matter in dispute is the order of the Judge awarding interest on the Petitioner’s share of the net proceeds of sale of 2 properties owned by a company called “Richmond” which was in turn jointly owned by the parties. The Judge’s order was, on appeal, varied by the Court of Appeal. The amount involved is said to be at least $26 million.

2. It is conceded, quite rightly in our view, that the appeal is plainly not as of right and no argument has been presented on this limb.

3. We are satisfied that it is quite arguable that there is no sound or legitimate basis for the award of interest, either as ordered by the Judge or as re-formulated or adjusted by the Court of Appeal and that it would be wrong to allow the award to stand. In these circumstances, which we think are rather exceptional, we would grant leave to appeal on the “or otherwise” limb under s.22(1)(b).

(Kemal Bokhary)	(Patrick Chan)	(R A V Ribeiro)
Permanent Judge	Permanent Judge	Permanent Judge

Mr Edward Chan, SC, Mr Dennis Law & Mr Lawrence Cheung (instructed by Messrs Howell & Co) for the applicants

Mr Anthony Neoh, SC and Mr Jeremy Bartlett (instructed by Messrs J. Chan, Yip, So & Partners) for the Respondent

Citation

Court

Procedural posture

Issues

Holdings

Legal principles

Disposition

Appeal history

TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS
CFI · 11 Nov 2005
On appeal from
TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS
CA · 26 May 2009
On appeal from
TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS
CA · 2 Sept 2009
On appeal from
TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS
CFA · 26 Feb 2010
This judgment
TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS
CFA · 7 Jan 2011
On appeal from
TAM SHUK YIN ANNY v. CHOI KWOK CHAN AND OTHERS
CFA · 9 Jun 2011
On appeal from