Kwok v HND Holdings Limited

[2025] NZHC 2648

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2023-404-1504

[2025] NZHC 2648

BETWEEN AND

AND

AND

DANIEL SHING CHUNG KWOK

First Plaintiff

DANIEL KWOK PROPERTIES LIMITED
Second Plaintiff

DASP PROPERTIES LIMITED
Third Plaintiff

DKBY PROPERTY LIMITED

Fourth Plaintiff

AND

HND HOLDINGS LIMITED

Defendant

Hearing:

(Determined on the papers)

Counsel:

M Phillipps for Plaintiffs

R O Parmenter for Defendant

Judgment:

11 September 2025

JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE LESTER

(Application by plaintiffs’ counsel to withdraw)

This judgment was delivered by me on 11 September 2025 at 2.15 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

……………………….

KWOK v HND HOLDINGS LIMITED [2025] NZHC 2648 [11 September 2025]

[1]        By an interlocutory application dated 9 September 2025, Mr Phillipps, solicitor for the plaintiffs, sought leave to withdraw as solicitor on the record for the plaintiffs (I note there being a typographical error in the last line of paragraph 1 of the application).

[2]        An affidavit has been filed setting out the grounds relied on by counsel seeking to withdraw, satisfying r 5.41(4) of the High Court Rules 2016 (the Rules).

[3]        However, the application does not satisfy r 5.41(5) of the Rules which provides counsel seeking to withdraw must inform the party for whom they acted of the effect r 5.42 will have on that party’s address for service if an order allowing them to withdraw is made.

[4]        I am satisfied that the circumstances warrant an order granting leave to withdraw being made and I make an order as sought.

[5]        Before that order is sealed, Mr Phillipps is to arrange for an affidavit of service required by r 5.41(5) and in  that affidavit  confirm that a notice complying  with      r 5.41(5) of the Rules in relation to address for service has been served on the plaintiffs.

[6]        Once those steps have been completed the order may be sealed and will take effect upon that order being served as required by r 5.41(3)(b) and the affidavit required by s 5.41(3)(C) being filed.

[7]The plaintiffs address for service will then be as per r 5.42 of the Rules.

[8]        Mr Phillipps is to ensure that a copy of the order is sent to the Official Assignee, the fourth plaintiff now being in liquidation.

[9]        The first plaintiff should be aware that he cannot represent the second and third plaintiffs. Mr Kwok should consider the future of his application seeking further discovery so as to avoid unnecessary costs if that application is unable to proceed.

Associate Judge Lester

Solicitors:

Vicki Ammundsen Trust Law Limited, Auckland (for Plaintiffs) Ganda & Associates, Newmarket (for Defendant)

Copy to counsel:

R O Parmenter, Barrister, Auckland (for Defendant)