CARRIAN INVESTMENTS LTD v. WONG CHONG PO AND OTHERS

CARRIAN INVESTMENTS LTD v. WONG CHONG PO AND OTHERS

The amended notice of motion to strike out was dismissed: the fiduciary/accounting claim was properly pleaded in essentials, factual issues (including whether the 4th defendant was a director) are for trial, and the Limitation Ordinance does not bar recovery because the claim seeks trust property/proceeds under a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CARRIAN INVESTMENTS LTD v. WONG CHONG PO AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff (in Liquidation): CARRIAN INVESTMENTS LIMITED; 1st Defendant: WONG CHONG-PO (alias ANANTA UENGSAKUL); 2nd Defendant: NG CHUE MENG (alias MONDOL KANJANAPAS); 3rd Defendant: CHUANG YUAN HSIEN; 4th Defendant: YEE HING CO. LTD.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 April 1986
Case Number
HCA7392/1985
Procedural Posture
Fiduciary Breach and Account Claim by Company in Liquidation / High Court Motion to Strike Out Statement of Claim (judgment on Motion)
Outcome
Amended notice of motion dismissed; statement of claim not struck out
Legal Topics
Fiduciary Duty, Constructive Trust, Accounting of Profits, Limitation Period for Equitable Relief, Strike Out Application
Source Language
en
Company Law Equity Trusts Civil Procedure Limitation Law Fiduciary Duty Constructive Trust Accounting of Profits +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CARRIAN INVESTMENTS LIMITED

Plaintiff (in Liquidation)

WONG CHONG-PO (alias ANANTA UENGSAKUL)

1st Defendant

NG CHUE MENG (alias MONDOL KANJANAPAS)

2nd Defendant

CHUANG YUAN HSIEN

3rd Defendant

YEE HING CO. LTD.

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Fiduciary Breach and Account Claim by Company in Liquidation / High Court Motion to Strike Out Statement of Claim (judgment on Motion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants as directors owed fiduciary duties and must account for profits derived from their position
  2. 2 Whether the statement of claim sufficiently particularised the knowledge/confidential information relied on
  3. 3 Whether the Limitation Ordinance bars the equitable claim/accounting (s4(2) v s4(7) and s20(1))

Ratio Decidendi

The amended notice of motion to strike out was dismissed: the fiduciary/accounting claim was properly pleaded in essentials, factual issues (including whether the 4th defendant was a director) are for trial, and the Limitation Ordinance does not bar recovery because the claim seeks trust property/proceeds under a constructive trust and is therefore excluded from the s4(2) six-year limitation by s20(1) and s4(7).

Court Disposition

Amended notice of motion dismissed; statement of claim not struck out

Orders

  • Amended notice of motion dismissed