LI WANG AND CHAO WANG - [2020] NZHC 309

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV 2019-404-1447

[2020] NZHC 309

BETWEEN
LI WANG

Plaintiff

AND

CHAO WANG

Defendant

Hearing: 19 February 2020

Appearances:

A Malone for the Plaintiff JS Clark for the Defendant

Judgment:

27 February 2020

JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE SMITH

This judgment was delivered by me on 27 February 2020 at 4pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors / Counsel:
Surrey Chambers, Auckland, Amy Malone amymalone@surreychambers.co.nz Wilson McKay, Auckland, JS Clark, JacquiClark@wilsonmckay.co.nz

Case Officer:
Anthony Chang

Wang v Wang [2020] NZHC 309 [27 February 2020]

[1] In July 2019 the plaintiff (Ms Wang) filed a claim in this Court for the recovery of a loan of $500,000 plus interest, said to have been made by her to the defendant (Mr Wang). Ms Wang took the view that Mr Wang had no defence to the claim, so she applied for summary judgment.

[2] Ms Wang could not locate Mr Wang to effect service of the summary judgment documents on him. She applied for an order for substituted service.

[3] By order made on 12 August 2019, Associate Judge Bell made an order for substituted service by serving a copy of the proceeding on Mr Wang’s New Zealand lawyer by delivering them to the lawyer’s office, by email to Mr Wang’s last known email address, and by message to his Facebook page.

[4] On 27 September 2019 Mr Wang filed a document protesting the New Zealand jurisdiction and asking for an order that the proceeding be dismissed. If the proceeding was not dismissed, he asked for an order for security for his costs in the proceeding. Ms Wang filed a notice of opposition to Mr Wang’s application.

[5] The parties agreed that Mr Wang’s application to dismiss the proceeding should be heard before Ms Wang’s summary judgment application. Affidavits have been filed on both sides on the application to dismiss, and I heard oral argument from counsel on 19 February 2020.

[6] I now give judgment on Mr Wang’s applications to dismiss the proceeding, or, if the proceeding is not dismissed, for an order for security for his costs.

Ms Wang’s claim and her evidence in support of her summary judgment application

[7] Ms Wang is an investment analyst who lives in Hong Kong. She married Mr Wang on 26 March 2016, but the parties separated on 22 November 2016. An order dissolving the marriage was made on 4 June 2019.

[8] Ms Wang says that on 23 March 2014, before she and Mr Wang began living together, they entered into a deed (the Deed), under which she agreed to lend Mr Wang the sum of $500,000.

[9]Ms Wang pleads that the loan agreement contained the following terms:

7.1An acknowledgement by the defendant that in consideration of the transfer of the sum of $500,000 to him, he owes the debt to the plaintiff (clause 2.1);

7.2The defendant must repay the plaintiff…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading LI WANG AND CHAO WANG

Details

AGLC: LI WANG AND CHAO WANG [2020] NZHC 309
Case: [2020] NZHC 309
Decision Date: 27 February 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Li Wang filed a claim against Chao Wang in the High Court of New Zealand seeking recovery of a loan of $500,000 plus interest, alleging that the defendant had no defence to the claim. Li Wang applied for summary judgment but was unable to locate Chao Wang to serve the documents and so sought substituted service. Chao Wang filed an application to dismiss the proceeding, or if the proceeding was not dismissed, an order for security for his costs. The issues for the court were whether the New Zealand court had jurisdiction to hear the case and whether there was a need for security for costs. The court found that the New Zealand court had jurisdiction and dismissed the application to dismiss the proceeding. The court ordered that the application for security for costs be adjourned for the parties to confer on an appropriate amount for security and how that security is to be provided. The court further ordered that if the parties were unable to agree, time would be allocated to hear from counsel on the appropriate amount to be ordered by way of security. The court also awarded Li Wang costs on Chao Wang's dismissal application.

Orders