|
HCA2351/2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
ACTION NO. 2351 OF 2005
---------------------
BETWEEN
| |
CHOY BING WING |
Plaintiff |
| |
and |
|
| |
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF HONG KONG
SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION,
CHINA |
1st Defendant |
| |
CHIEF JUSTICE OF HONG KONG
SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION,
CHINA |
2nd Defendant |
| |
SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE OF HONG KONG
SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION,
CHINA |
3rd Defendant |
| |
MR JUSTICE M.J. HARTMANN,
JUDGE OF COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION,
CHINA |
4th Defendant |
| |
MR JUSTICE A.R. SUFFIAD,
JUDGE OF COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION,
CHINA |
5th Defendant |
---------------------
Before : Hon Yam J in Chambers
Date of Hearing : 20 February 2008
Date of Judgment : 20 February 2008
------------------------
J U D G M E N T
------------------------
1. This is an appeal of Mr Choy against a decision of Master Yu in granting an order absolute against his property. The debt outstanding was the costs taxed in the case herein in the sum of $58,000 odd.
2. The only concern of this court is whether the charging order should be made absolute. Mr Choy raised several points in his appeal. At first he attacked, as far as I understand it, the original order made on 23 December 2005 by my brother Lam J. But I have reminded Mr Choy that I am just a Court of the First Instance and I have no jurisdiction to consider Lam J’s judgment, which is regular on its face, and the costs taxed was made pursuant thereof. His allocatur was issued on 22 January 2007.
3. There were certain arguments in the court below before Master Yu. Master Yu, no doubt, according to the record of proceedings, said there was dispute between the parties on facts and on law and he would have to adjourn it for argument subject to certain directions to be made.
4. After several exchanges between Mr Choy and Master Yu, Mr Choy left the hearing chambers at about 10:11 a.m. Thereafter, Miss Leung for the defendants made her submissions and persuaded the learned master that there was no reason why the charging order should not be made absolute. Master Yu thereafter then passed an oral judgment which is at page 4 between D to the end of the page. No doubt that was made in the absence of Mr Choy, but then it was Mr Choy’s own choice to leave the master’s chambers.
5. I have thoroughly considered the case. There is no reason why the charging order should not be made absolute.
6. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. No doubt Mr Choy knows that costs will have to follow the event.
[Submissions re costs]
7. Those points raised by Mr Choy have been considered in my main judgment. There is nothing which would persuade me that costs should not follow the event.
8. The usual order of costs to the defendants summarily assessed at $9,000 to be added to the total amount of costs charged in the charging order which was made absolute.
| |
( D. Yam )
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court |
Plaintiff in person
Miss Jenny Fung, SGC of the Department of Justice, for all the Defendants
|