DCCJ 4215/2023

[2025] HKDC 1255

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CIVIL ACTION NO 4215 OF 2023

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

BETWEEN

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

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

DECISION

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

Background

1. This is the Defendant’s application by way of summons dated 2 December 2024 for leave to appeal (“the Application”) against my decision of 26 November 2024 (“the Decision”) as per [2024] HKDC 1999 , that took place on 24 April 2025 (“the Hearing”).

2. This decision adopts those same terms and abbreviations used in the Decision and refers to the substantive facts and findings made thereof. Notably, the Decision ordered that summary judgment be entered for the Plaintiff for damages to be assessed for breach of the Sale and Purchase Agreement and the Licence as well my ordering that the Defendant’s counterclaim be struck out.

3. As a preliminary point, the Defendant did not appear at the Hearing and was “represented” by his mother, Madam Wong, who previously appeared before DDJ Alan Kwong (as he then was).

4. The reason for the Defendant’s absence and for Madam Wong representing him at the Hearing was dubious. In summary, the Defendant wrote and faxed a letter written in English to the Judiciary and solicitors for the Plaintiff two days before the Hearing stating that he “ would like to apply [for] my mother, Madam Wong Kong Heung to be my [representative] for the [hearing] ” due to his illnesses and since “ my mother is the key person in the Sales and Purchase Agreement processing, I am afraid that she is the most suitable person to handle my hearing on 24 April 2025. ” (“the Defendant’s Letter”).

5. At the Hearing, advocate for solicitors for the Plaintiff, Miss Hayley Yeung initially objected to Madam Wong’s “representing” the Defendant at the Hearing given the last minute “application” by the Defendant’s Letter. After some discussion, Miss Yeung narrowed down her opposing submissions by making more focussed references to Hong Kong Civil Procedure 2025 (“the White Book”) at, inter alia , 80/2/10 and 80/6/8 at the hearing in support of her opposing submissions. Miss Yeung ultimately did not object, in the circumstances faced at the Hearing, to allow the court to proceed with hearing submissions of Madam Wong where notably Miss Yeung in her reply was fair in the treatment of Madam Wong’s submissions.

6. Solicitors for the Plaintiff both correctly and helpfully prepared a hearing bundle for the Hearing despite it was the Defendant’s responsibility to do so given the Application was being lodged by him.

7. As per Kwan Kam Ping (關錦萍) v Angel Face Beauty Creations (International) Ltd (唐安麒美顏創造中心(國際)有限公司) [2025] 2 HKLRD 512 , where the plaintiff acted in person, the defendant’s solicitors sent a letter to court before trial, noting that the plaintiff had not prepared a pre-trial review