CHEUNG AH MEI AND ANOTHER v. WONG SHIU LING

HCA 2025/2014

[2019] HKCFI 2615

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 2025 of 2014

____________

____________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1.  In granting leave to parties to file supplemental witness statements, the Court is exercising its discretion and case management powers, in accordance with the underlying objectives of the CJR. Procedural economy, proportionality, reasonable necessity, costs effectiveness, and an early and efficient trial are matters to be considered.

2.  Issues for determination at trial are decided by the pleadings, and not by the witness statements, which should only deal with material facts which are relevant to the issues in dispute, as pleaded.

3.  Having considered these pleadings, and the key issues which are in dispute and which are for resolution at trial, I am not satisfied that any good reason (let alone any exceptional circumstances) has been shown by the Defendant for leave to be granted to further amend her Defence and to file the supplemental statement 7 weeks before trial, when trial dates have been fixed over 12 months ago in September 2018.

4.  The beneficial ownership of the shares in the Company held firstly by the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, then by Rapid Win and later by Lufu are not really in dispute and they are not the key issues for trial.

5.  The relevance of the Licence Agreement has not been established to my satisfaction.  The Abolition Agreement and the breach thereof are new matters which have not been raised in the Defence before.

6.  In the available time between now and trial, the Plaintiffs would suffer real prejudice in having to deal with these amendments and the proposed supplemental statement, in the short time remaining before trial.

7.  In relation to the factual matters which the Defendant seeks to set out in her supplemental statement, there has been no reason given, as to why they were not dealt with before in her original statements.  As to matters which are allegedly not new, and are already covered by her earlier statements, it is not necessary to refer to them or to repeat them in her proposed statement.

8.  Having regard to all these matters, and for the foregoing reasons, I refuse leave to amend the Defence and to file the witness statement.  Costs of the applications are to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs.