WISE SECURITY LTD v. NIP FUNG SUI AND ANOTHER

HCA 1387/2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1387 OF 2003

_______________

JUDGMENT

_______________

1. This is an appeal by the 1^st defendant from the decision of Registrar C Chan given on 4 May 2005 dismissing the 1^st defendant’s summons dated 30 March 2005 for further and better particulars of the statement of claim.

2. The plaintiff’s causes of action against the 1^st defendant as set out in the statement of claim are for misuse of confidential information, procuring a breach of contract and alternatively, a claim based on unlawful interference. 

3. As the statement of claim pleads, the 1^st defendant was employed by the plaintiff as a general manager from 1 April 1996 to 11 May 2002.  He was dismissed by the plaintiff on 11 May 2002.  He is said to have had access to confidential business information of the plaintiff. 

4. The 2^nd defendant was incorporated on 8 November 2002.  It is alleged that the 2^nd defendant took over the plaintiff’s contract with a Joint Venture Company.  It is alleged that between 3 November 2001 and 10 May 2002 the 1^st defendant, through the 2^nd defendant, successfully competed with the plaintiff in relation to the contract with the Joint Venture Company and “also seduced” the Joint Venture Company to transfer the plaintiff’s contract to the 2^nd defendant. 

5. It is also alleged that the 1^st defendant “in joint enterprise” with the 2^nd defendant deliberately failed to supervise security guards so that the plaintiff was in breach of its contract with the Joint Venture Company.  It is said that this was an indirect interference by the defendants with a view to procuring a breach of contract. 

6. Mrs. Ki, for the plaintiff, submitted that the 1^st defendant knew all along what the confidential information was.  She also submitted that directions have already been given by the Listing Master and that the matter is ready for trial save for this appeal.  She submitted that in the circumstances the appeal should be dismissed. 

7. I am unable to accept the submissions of Mrs. Ki.  It is useful to remember the functions of properly particularized pleadings.  This includes informing the other side of the nature of the case that they have to meet.  It also includes tying the hands of the party so that he cannot without leave go into any matters not included in the pleading and particulars. 

8. The statement of claim as pleaded lacks any particulars whatsoever as to what the confidential information is that the plaintiff is seeking to protect.  It also lacks any particulars as to how it is said that the 1^st defendant has misused the confidential information. 

9. A plaintiff must specify in sufficient detail the nature, scope and identity of the confidential information.  Where this is not done in the statement of claim, an order for particulars will be made. 

10. The plaintiff is entitled to particulars of the case it has to meet in respect of each of the causes of action against the 1^st defendant.  I am satisfied that the 1^st defendant is entitled to most of the particulars it seeks by its summons. 

11. I allow the appeal and set aside the Registrar’s order.  I make an order that the plaintiff do give answers to the following requests for further and better particulars of the statement of claim as per copy annexed to the summons dated 30 March 2005 within 14 days from the date of this order :

under requests 1a., b., c., 2a., 3b., 4a., b, 5a., b., c. and 7. 

Those are the requests in respect of which an order is made.