BHAGWAN SHANKARDAS MOORJANI v. THE KA WAH BANK LTD.

CACV 116/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 116 OF 2000

(ON APPEAL FROM HCA 16440 OF 1998)

________________

________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Hon Mayo VP (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. This is an application for leave to appeal which is made pursuant to section 22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484 by the defendant. It is necessary for the defendant to demonstrate that there are questions of great general or public importance or that otherwise it is appropriate that we should grant leave. This appeal concerns the construction of clause 3 of a contract which is used by the defendant. There is no evidence before us that any other bank or finance house uses a contract incorporating the language of clause 3.

2. While it may undoubtedly be a matter of importance to the defendant how the clause is interpreted we do not think it can be said that it is a matter of great general or public importance or that there is any other good reason why leave should be granted. The application is accordingly dismissed.

3. The US$20,000 which the plaintiff paid to the defendant as security for costs shall be repaid to him within 7 days. Interest is payable on these moneys from the date when they were paid to the defendant until the date when repayment is made and the rate of interest will be certified by the Registrar. The rate will be the rate payable on Suitor's funds in court at the relevant time. Also there will be an order that the HK$60,000 which was paid into court by the plaintiff will be repaid to him together with any interest payable thereon.