Jiaqing Xu v Cao & Du Management Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1474

Jiaqing Xu v Cao & Du Management Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1474

On the evidence before the Court, the plaintiff has a prima facie case that a substantial sum is owed, and there is evidence suggesting risk of dissipation of assets by the defendants. The circumstances warrant making interim property preservation orders, in the terms providing clarity and certainty as sought by the plaintiff and excluding proposed non-specific carve outs and exceptions, but not extending to orders for disclosure of information about assets at this interim stage.

Parties
Plaintiff: Jiaqing Xu; First Defendant: Cao & Du Management Pty Ltd; Second Defendant in the Substantive Proceedings, Not Present: Howard Hao Ting Cao
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Interim Orders on Urgent Application
Outcome
Interim property preservation (freezing) orders granted in line with plaintiff's amended notice of motion (except for orders 8 and 9 regarding provision of information); matter listed for contested hearing; case management orders made.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Property Preservation Orders, Interlocutory Relief, Case Management
Civil Law Common Law Freezing Orders Property Preservation Orders Interlocutory Relief Case Management

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jiaqing Xu

Plaintiff

Cao & Du Management Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Howard Hao Ting Cao

Second Defendant in the Substantive Proceedings, Not Present

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Interim Orders on Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether urgent interim property preservation (freezing) orders should be made against defendant's assets
  2. 2 Whether sufficient evidence exists of a risk of dissipation of assets
  3. 3 Whether information disclosure orders should be made at this stage

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence before the Court, the plaintiff has a prima facie case that a substantial sum is owed, and there is evidence suggesting risk of dissipation of assets by the defendants. The circumstances warrant making interim property preservation orders, in the terms providing clarity and certainty as sought by the plaintiff and excluding proposed non-specific carve outs and exceptions, but not extending to orders for disclosure of information about assets at this interim stage.

Court Disposition

Interim property preservation (freezing) orders granted in line with plaintiff's amended notice of motion (except for orders 8 and 9 regarding provision of information); matter listed for contested hearing; case management orders made.

Orders

  • Grant the orders sought in the plaintiff's amended notice of motion except for orders 8 and 9 of annexures A and B.
  • List the matter for hearing on Friday, 29 November 2024 with an estimate of half a day.