113 lines
5.2 KiB
YAML
113 lines
5.2 KiB
YAML
plaintiff:
|
||
- COMPETITION COMMISSION
|
||
defendant:
|
||
- ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LIMITED
|
||
- ANALOGUE HOLDINGS LIMITED
|
||
- SHUN HING ENGINEERING CONTRACTING COMPANY LIMITED
|
||
- SHUN HING HOLDINGS COMPANY LIMITED
|
||
- SER KA WAI
|
||
- CHENG KIT SHUN
|
||
- KWAN SIU KIN
|
||
- ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LIMITED
|
||
- JOHNSON CONTROLS HONG KONG LIMITED
|
||
- YORK INTERNATIONAL (NORTHERN ASIA) LIMITED
|
||
- JOHNSON CONTROLS INTERNATIONAL PLC
|
||
- LEE YUI MING
|
||
jurisdiction_code: HKCT
|
||
jurisdiction_name: 香港特別行政區競爭事務審裁處
|
||
case_location:
|
||
- 香港特別行政區
|
||
case_reason: "Commission and ATAL seek judicial review challenging the Tribunal's decision directing questions\
|
||
\ on "
|
||
case_object:
|
||
- judicial review
|
||
judgment_result:
|
||
- charge: Refusal to grant leave to appeal in respect of the determination of Kam Kwong applications (liability
|
||
issue)
|
||
result: Disallowed. The Court found that there was no material point of law involved and the Commission's
|
||
wish to reargue the matter before the Court of Appeal did not demonstrate a reasonable prospect of
|
||
success.
|
||
- charge: Refusal to grant leave to appeal in respect of disclosure decision (liability issue)
|
||
result: Disallowed. The Court found that it did not have a reasonable prospect of success or raise an
|
||
issue on which it would be helpful for the Court of Appeal to opine.
|
||
- charge: Direction regarding hearing of two proceedings together (disposition issue)
|
||
result: Allowed. The Tribunal directed that the two proceedings be heard together with liberty to apply,
|
||
and ordered that 80% of the costs in both proceedings be paid by the Commission; 20% be paid by the
|
||
1st Respondent to the 3rd to 7th Respondents in CTEA 2/2022 and 2nd to 5th Respondents in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
with a certificate for two counsel.
|
||
judgment_summary: >-
|
||
In this case, the Competition Commission sought judicial review of the Tribunal's decision directing
|
||
questions on liability issues in two proceedings (CTEA 2/2022 and CTEA 2/2023). The core issue was whether
|
||
leave should be granted to appeal the Tribunal’s decisions. The Court assessed evidence and,
|
||
involved_entities:
|
||
- entity_name: Hon Harris J
|
||
reason: President of the Competition Tribunal, responsible for fact-finding and adjudication.
|
||
- entity_name: Jonathan Harris
|
||
reason: President of the Competition Tribunal
|
||
- entity_name: CTEA 2/2022
|
||
reason: Case number in the Competition Tribunal
|
||
- entity_name: CTEA 2/2023
|
||
reason: Case number in the Competition Tribunal
|
||
- entity_name: Competition Commission
|
||
reason: Applicant in both CTEA 2/2022 and CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LIMITED
|
||
reason: 1st Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: ANALOGUE HOLDINGS LIMITED
|
||
reason: 2nd Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: SHUN HING ENGINEERING CONTRACTING COMPANY LIMITED
|
||
reason: 3rd Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: SHUN HING HOLDINGS COMPANY LIMITED
|
||
reason: 4th Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: SER KA WAI
|
||
reason: 5th Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: CHENG KIT SHUN
|
||
reason: 6th Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: KWAN SIU KIN
|
||
reason: 7th Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: JOHNSON CONTROLS HONG KONG LIMITED
|
||
reason: 2nd Respondent in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: YORK INTERNATIONAL (NORTHERN ASIA) LIMITED
|
||
reason: 3rd Respondent in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: JOHNSON CONTROLS INTERNATIONAL PLC
|
||
reason: 4th Respondent in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: LEE YUI MING
|
||
reason: 5th Respondent in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Norman NIP SC
|
||
reason: Counsel for the applicant in both CTEA 2/2022 and CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Ms Leticia Tang
|
||
reason: Counsel for the applicant in both CTEA 2/2022 and CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Jonathan Fung
|
||
reason: Counsel for the applicant in both CTEA 2/2022 and CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Abraham Chan SC
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Joshua Chan
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: Ms Ebony Ling
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 3rd respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Dicky Cheung
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 4th respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Jonathan Ip
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 4th respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Patrick Siu
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 5th and 6th respondents in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: The 7th respondent appeared in person
|
||
reason: Respondent in CTEA 2/2022
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Norman NIP SC
|
||
reason: Counsel for the applicant in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Ms Leticia Tang
|
||
reason: Counsel for the applicant in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Jonathan Fung
|
||
reason: Counsel for the applicant in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Abraham Chan SC
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 1st respondent in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Joshua Chan
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 1st respondent in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Paul Shieh SC
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 2nd to 4th respondents in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Jonathan Ng
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 2nd to 4th respondents in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: Mr Stephen Crosswell, solicitor advocate of Baker & McKenzie
|
||
reason: Counsel for the 2nd to 4th respondents in CTEA 2/2023
|
||
- entity_name: The 5th respondent was not represented and did not appear
|
||
reason: Respondent in CTEA 2/2023
|