Pacific Electric Wire & Cable Co Ltd v Gold Global Ltd And Others

Judgment Date09 November 2010
CourtCourt of Appeal (Hong Kong)
Judgement NumberCACV351/2008
Subject MatterCivil Appeal
CACV208E/2008 PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE CO LTD v. HARMUTTY LTD AND OTHERS

HCCL17/2009, HCCL18/2009,
CACV208/2008, CACV210/2008,
CACV211/2008, CACV212/2008,
CACV351/2008 & CACV352/2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMMERCIAL ACTION NO. 17 OF 2009

(TRANSFERRED FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2746 OF 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE COMPANY LIMITED Plaintiff

and

GOLD GLOBAL LIMITED 1st Defendant
PCL NOMINEES LIMITED 2nd Defendant
GREATEAM LIMITED 3rd Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 4th Defendant
CHUNG CHE LING 5th Defendant
YIP CHI HUNG 6th Defendant
TAM PUI NA, RAFIA 7th Defendant
HARMUTTY LIMITED 8th Defendant
_______________________


COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMMERCIAL ACTION NO. 18 OF 2009

(TRANSFERRED FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2763 OF 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE COMPANY LIMITED Plaintiff

and

HARMUTTY LIMITED 1st Defendant
HADDOWE LIMITED 2nd Defendant
CASPARSON PROPERTIES LIMITED 3rd Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 4th Defendant
YIP CHI HUNG 5th Defendant
CHUNG CHE LING 6th Defendant
TUNG YU JEH 7th Defendant
SUN TAO TSUN 8th Defendant
TAM PUI NA, RAFIA 9th Defendant
WONG KUN TO 10th Defendant
CHEUNG KWAN HUNG, ANTHONY 11th Defendant
AFTERVILLE LIMITED 12th Defendant
NEE SOON LIMITED 13th Defendant
SHOWGROUND LIMITED 14th Defendant
BERRIDALE DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED 15th Defendant
JUTECH INVESTMENTS LIMITED 16th Defendant
ALL DRAGON INTERNATIONAL
LIMITED
17th Defendant
BLINCO ENTERPRISES LIMITED 18th Defendant
PATAGONIA LIMITED 19th Defendant
MA KAM FOOK, ROBERT 20th Defendant
HU SUN MAR LI 21st Defendant
TOP SELECTION COMPANY
LIMITED
22nd Defendant
_______________________


COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 208 OF 2008

(ON APPEAL FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2763 OF 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE COMPANY LIMITED Plaintiff

and

HARMUTTY LIMITED 1st Defendant
HADDOWE LIMITED 2nd Defendant
CASPARSON PROPERTIES LIMITED 3rd Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 4th Defendant
YIP CHI HUNG 5th Defendant
CHUNG CHE LING 6th Defendant
TUNG YU JEH 7th Defendant
SUN TAO TSUN 8th Defendant
TAM PUI NA, RAFIA 9th Defendant
WONG KUN TO 10th Defendant
CHEUNG KWAN HUNG, ANTHONY 11th Defendant
AFTERVILLE LIMITED 12th Defendant
NEE SOON LIMITED 13th Defendant
SHOWGROUND LIMITED 14th Defendant
BERRIDALE DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED 15th Defendant
JUTECH INVESTMENTS LIMITED 16th Defendant
ALL DRAGON INTERNATIONAL
LIMITED
17th Defendant
BLINCO ENTERPRISES LIMITED 18th Defendant
PATAGONIA LIMITED 19th Defendant
MA KAM FOOK, ROBERT 20th Defendant
HU SUN MAR LI 21st Defendant
_______________________

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 210 OF 2008

(ON APPEAL FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2203 OF 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE
& CABLE COMPANY LIMITED
Plaintiff

and

TEXAN MANAGEMENT LIMITED 1st Defendant
CLIPPER INVESTMENT LIMITED
(FORMERLY KNOWN AS PACIFIC
CAPITAL (INVESTMENT) LIMITED)
2nd Defendant
PACIFIC CAPITAL (ASIA) LIMITED 3rd Defendant
ALL DRAGON INTERNATIONAL
LIMITED
4th Defendant
PCL HOLDINGS LIMITED
(FORMERLY KNOWN AS PACIFIC
CAPITAL (HOLDINGS) LIMITED)
5th Defendant
LAIDLAW PACIFIC FINANCIAL
SERVICES (HOLDINGS) LIMITED
(FORMERLY KNOWN AS PACIFIC
CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES
(HOLDINGS) LIMITED)
6th Defendant
SUPER WISH LIMITED 7th Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 8th Defendant
WONG KUN TO 9th Defendant
CHEUNG KWAN HUNG, ANTHONY 10th Defendant
MA KAM FOOK, ROBERT 11th Defendant
CHENG SHU WING 12th Defendant
TUNG YU JEH 13th Defendant
SUN TAO TSUN 14th Defendant
PANG HONG 15th Defendant
___________________

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 211 OF 2008

(ON APPEAL FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2746 OF 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE
& CABLE COMPANY LIMITED
Plaintiff

and

GOLD GLOBAL LIMITED 1st Defendant
PCL NOMINEES LIMITED 2nd Defendant
GREATEAM LIMITED 3rd Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 4th Defendant
CHUNG CHE LING 5th Defendant
YIP CHI HUNG 6th Defendant
TAM PUI NA, RAFIA 7th Defendant
HARMUTTY LIMITED 8th Defendant
_______________________

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 212 OF 2008

(ON APPEAL FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2763 OF 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE
& CABLE COMPANY LIMITED
Plaintiff

and

HARMUTTY LIMITED 1st Defendant
HADDOWE LIMITED 2nd Defendant
CASPARSON PROPERTIES LIMITED 3rd Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 4th Defendant
YIP CHI HUNG 5th Defendant
CHUNG CHE LING 6th Defendant
TUNG YU JEH 7th Defendant
SUN TAO TSUN 8th Defendant
TAM PUI NA, RAFIA 9th Defendant
WONG KUN TO 10th Defendant
CHEUNG KWAN HUNG, ANTHONY 11th Defendant
AFTERVILLE LIMITED 12th Defendant
NEE SOON LIMITED 13th Defendant
SHOWGROUND LIMITED 14th Defendant
BERRIDALE DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED 15th Defendant
JUTECH INVESTMENTS LIMITED 16th Defendant
ALL DRAGON INTERNATIONAL
LIMITED
17th Defendant
BLINCO ENTERPRISES LIMITED 18th Defendant
PATAGONIA LIMITED 19th Defendant
MA KAM FOOK, ROBERT 20th Defendant
HU SUN MAR LI 21st Defendant
_______________________

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 351 OF 2008

(ON APPEAL FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2746 OF 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE
& CABLE COMPANY LIMITED
Plaintiff

and

GOLD GLOBAL LIMITED 1st Defendant
PCL NOMINEES LIMITED 2nd Defendant
GREATEAM LIMITED 3rd Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 4th Defendant
CHUNG CHE LING 5th Defendant
YIP CHI HUNG 6th Defendant
TAM PUI NA, RAFIA 7th Defendant
HARMUTTY LIMITED 8th Defendant
_______________________

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 352 OF 2008

(ON APPEAL FROM CIVIL ACTION NO. 2763 OF 2004)

_____________________

BETWEEN

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE
& CABLE COMPANY LIMITED
Plaintiff

and

HARMUTTY LIMITED 1st Defendant
HADDOWE LIMITED 2nd Defendant
CASPARSON PROPERTIES LIMITED 3rd Defendant
HU HUNG CHIU 4th Defendant
YIP CHI HUNG 5th Defendant
CHUNG CHE LING 6th Defendant
TUNG YU JEH 7th Defendant
SUN TAO TSUN 8th Defendant
TAM PUI NA, RAFIA 9th Defendant
WONG KUN TO 10th Defendant
CHEUNG KWAN HUNG, ANTHONY 11th Defendant
AFTERVILLE LIMITED 12th Defendant
NEE SOON LIMITED 13th Defendant
SHOWGROUND LIMITED 14th Defendant
BERRIDALE DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED 15th Defendant
JUTECH INVESTMENTS LIMITED 16th Defendant
ALL DRAGON INTERNATIONAL
LIMITED
17th Defendant
BLINCO ENTERPRISES LIMITED 18th Defendant
PATAGONIA LIMITED 19th Defendant
MA KAM FOOK, ROBERT 20th Defendant
HU SUN MAR LI 21st Defendant
_______________________

Coram: Master de Souza in Chambers (Open to the Public)

Date of Hearing: 16-18 August, 5 & 9 November 2010

Date of Decision: 9 November 2010

__________________

D E C I S I O N

__________________

Background

1. These are applications dated 13 and 16 August 2010 by the Plaintiff, PEWC, for leave to amend its list of objections filed in CACV208, 210, 211, 212, 351 and 352 of 2008 on 8 January 2010, and its list of objections filed in HCCL17 and 18 of 2009 on 8 January 2010.

2. The substantial amendments sought in respect of the costs of the two commercial list cases, namely, HCCL17 and 18 of 2009, appear as item 125 of the proposed amended list of objections. In respect of the remaining six appeals, the proposed amended objection is principally item 131 of the list of objections.

3. Mr Hu Hung-chiu (“Mr Hu”) is the 4th defendant in the commercial actions and in the CACV actions except in CACV210 of 2008 as the 8th defendant.

4. Similar submissions and objections are advanced as respect the proposed amendments and I have been invited to adjudicate upon them together.

5. In essence, the proposed amended objections now seek to argue that Mr Hu should not be entitled to his costs for his defence and evidence filed in the aforementioned proceedings as he has been convicted on 30 July 2010 in the Taiwan Criminal Court of various forgery offences against the Plaintiff and sentenced to 18 years’ imprisonment and fined NT$1 billion. The Plaintiff was, as it admitted in correspondence dated 13 July 2010, one of the complainants in the criminal suit.

6. It is said, upon a detailed analysis of the Taiwan judgment by Mr To, then acting for the Plaintiff (now latterly represented by Mr Yen), that Mr Hu’s Taiwan defence, so thoroughly discredited by the Taiwan Court and so closely mirroring his defence and evidence raised in the Hong Kong actions and appeals, as to have become highly relevant and admissible if a proper and just disposal of the taxation of his bills of costs is to be achieved.

7....

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT