XCHRX WILSON L. YEUNG & CO. (A FIRM) v. HO & CHAN (A FIRM)

HCA 16167/1998

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 16167 OF 1998

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. This is an application against a solicitor's firm for summary judgment for specific performance of the latter's undertaking to forward certain documents to the plaintiff solicitor in exchange for certain cheques.

2. This is an action at law, not proceedings under the summary jurisdiction exercised by the court over solicitors. There seems to be no doubt that the undertakings were given, and indeed subsequently confirmed (by letter dated 28 August 1998), but it is said for the defendant that the cheques were not provided as envisaged by the undertakings and that, in any event, the arrangements in question were not genuine, the documentation being merely window-dressing.

3. It is also said that the undertakings were not given in the ordinary course of business, at any rate so far as one partner, Ho, and another (salaried) partner, Emerson, are concerned, and that anyway, as a salaried partner, Emerson would not be liable on the undertakings in any event. The practice of the plaintiff was at one stage under the control of the Law Society, but I am told it is no longer so. The Law Society have expressed no interest in participating in the present proceedings. The company at the centre of the transaction in relation to which the undertakings were given is subject to winding-up proceedings.

4. Order 14 enables the court to give the plaintiff a quick judgment in a case in which it is plain and obvious that the defendant has no defence to the plaintiff's claim.

5. This is not such a case. The dispute between the parties is quite unsuitable for resolution on an application for summary judgment. I consider that this application should never have been made and I will dismiss it with costs.