LO MEI KIN STELLA v. LO MEI KIN STELLA

LO MEI KIN STELLA v. LO MEI KIN STELLA

Because the matters relied on to justify discharge of the interlocutory injunctions were identical to central issues at the substantive trial and would require credibility findings and witness evidence that would prejudice the trial and risk inconsistent findings or duplication, the court refused to bring forward...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
LO MEI KIN STELLA v. LO MEI KIN STELLA
Parties
Plaintiff (by Original Action): YUEN MINGHWA FRANCOIS; Defendant (by Original Action): LO MEI KIN STELLA; Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): LO MEI KIN STELLA; 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim): YUEN MINGHWA FRANCOIS; 2nd Defendant (by Counterclaim): YUEN MINGTA MICHAEL; 3rd Defendant (by Counterclaim): YUEN MINGLAN HELGA; Plaintiff (hca 1609/2010): ASIAN POWERS LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 February 2011
Case Number
HCA2682/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Probate/estate Dispute / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Injunction; Case Management and Trial Consolidation (reasons for Ruling)
Outcome
Application to bring forward the hearing date to discharge the interlocutory injunctions refused; application to have the matter heard by another judge refused; matter to be consolidated and heard with the substantive trial after a short adjournment.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Mareva Injunction, Trial Consolidation, Case Management, Discharge of Injunctions, Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Injunctions Probate Equity Trusts Interlocutory Injunction Mareva Injunction Trial Consolidation +3 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YUEN MINGHWA FRANCOIS

Plaintiff (by Original Action)

LO MEI KIN STELLA

Defendant (by Original Action)

LO MEI KIN STELLA

Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

YUEN MINGHWA FRANCOIS

1st Defendant (by Counterclaim)

YUEN MINGTA MICHAEL

2nd Defendant (by Counterclaim)

YUEN MINGLAN HELGA

3rd Defendant (by Counterclaim)

ASIAN POWERS LIMITED

Plaintiff (hca 1609/2010)

Procedural Posture

Civil Probate/estate Dispute / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Injunction; Case Management and Trial Consolidation (reasons for Ruling)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to set aside interlocutory injunctions should be heard earlier than the scheduled trial date
  2. 2 Whether the application should be heard by a different judge
  3. 3 Whether the defendant suffers irreparable prejudice from continued freezing of assets

Ratio Decidendi

Because the matters relied on to justify discharge of the interlocutory injunctions were identical to central issues at the substantive trial and would require credibility findings and witness evidence that would prejudice the trial and risk inconsistent findings or duplication, the court refused to bring forward the hearing or have it heard by another judge and ordered the application to be heard together with the trial after a short adjournment.

Court Disposition

Application to bring forward the hearing date to discharge the interlocutory injunctions refused; application to have the matter heard by another judge refused; matter to be consolidated and heard with the substantive trial after a short adjournment.

Orders

  • Application to bring forward the hearing date to discharge the interlocutory injunctions refused.
  • Allocated three additional days to the scheduled trial hearing.