LAU, WILLIAM JOHN v. WAN, YUK LIN, ALISON AND OTHERS

HCA 1255/2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1255 OF 2006

____________

____________

_______________

R U L I N G

_______________

1.  I have considered the latest affidavit of the Plaintiff and the submissions on both sides.  It is true that the Plaintiff did have a right to amend the Writ of Summons before service without leave.  His argument based on such right would have been stronger but for the fact that he wrote the letter dated 12 June 2006 to all 7 Defendants, notifying them of the issue of the writ although he was not serving the same on them.

2.  This was in effect like hanging the Sword of Democles over their heads.  As it has turned out, the Plaintiff has now abandoned any claim against the 5^th, 6^th and 7^th Defendants.  Hence, the 5^th, 6^th and 7^th Defendants were justified in launching the strike-out application.  Moreover, the Plaintiff has always accepted that parts of the original Writ of Summons were badly drafted.

3.  Taking the broad-brush approach, as I had indicated in my judgment handed down on 22 June 2007, I maintain my original costs order, the order nisi on costs is now made absolute, i.e. it is confirmed.

4.  Strictly speaking, this matter could have been dealt with on the last occasion when I was actually in a position to announce my decision but as it turned out I did not do so and reserved judgment.  So if the matter had been dealt with the last time, we would not have needed to come back. Again taking a broad-brush approach, I also order the costs of today to be in the cause.