SIBERIAN MINING GROUP CO LTD v. ZHI, CHARLES

HCMP 443/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 443 OF 2015

____________

IN THE MATTER of Section 27 of the High Court Ordinance (Cap 4), Order 32A of the Rules of the High Court (Cap 4A), and the inherent jurisdiction of the Court

_____________

BETWEEN
SIBERIAN MINING GROUP COMPANY LIMITED Plaintiff
and
ZHI, CHARLES
(also known as “CHI CHANG HYUN”,
“CHANG CHI HYUN”, “ZHI CHARLES”,
“CHARLES ZHI” and “CHARLES CHI”)
Defendant

_____________

Before: Hon G Lam J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 7 September 2016
Date of Decision: 7 September 2016

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1. This application must be dismissed. Leave is required before the defendant can appeal against my judgment of 20 June 2016, becauseit was relevantly “made with the consent of the parties”, within the meaning of section 14(3)(e) of the High Court Ordinance (Cap 4). By Order 59, Rule 2B(1)(b) of the Rules of the High Court (Cap 4A), such an application for leave to appeal:

“… may only be made to the Court in the first instance within 14 days from the date of the judgment or order.”

That period of time expired on 4 July 2016. The defendant’s summons was filed out of time on 14 July 2016.

2. There have been a number of decisions of the Court of First Instance that this court does not have any power to extend the timeprescribed by Order 59, Rule 2B(1): see Wynn Resorts (Macau) SA v Mong Henry [2009] 5 HKC 515, per Chu J; Menno Leendert Vos v Global Fair Industrial Limited (unreported, HCA 4200/1995, 23 April 2010), per To J; Choi Chung Bun Vincent v Australia China Holdings Limited (unreported, HCA 539/2009, 6 October 2011), per McWalters J; and Zebra Industries (Orogenesis Nova) Limited v Wah Tong Paper Products Group Limited (unreported, HCCT 46/2011, 25 July 2012), per Au J.

3. I am not persuaded that I should depart from this by now well-settled interpretation of the Rule. There is therefore no jurisdictionto entertain this application, which must therefore be dismissed.

(Godfrey Lam)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Mr Eugene Kwok, instructed by Baker & McKenzie, for the plaintiff

The defendant appeared in person