TENWOW INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ANOTHER v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER

TENWOW INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ANOTHER v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER

Leave to appeal is refused because the proposed grounds lack merit and are improperly pleaded (argumentative repetition), the court correctly exercised its discretion in refusing the LOR absent evidence that the Mutual Arrangement applied or that the D2 documents were blanket-prohibited Regulated Information, and D2 failed to satisfy the Ladd v Marshall test for fresh evidence.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2692
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Tenwow International Holdings Limited (in liquidation); 2nd Plaintiff: Nan Pu International Limited (in creditors' voluntary winding up); 1st Defendant: PricewaterhouseCoopers (a firm); 2nd Defendant: 普华永道中天会计师事务所 (特殊普通合伙) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS ZHONG TIAN LLP
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 September 2024
Case Number
HCCL5/2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Application for Leave to Appeal (decision Refusing Leave)
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Letters of Request, Mutual Arrangement, Disclosure, Regulated Information, Stay of Execution, Costs, Fresh Evidence (ladd V Marshall), Data Security Regulation
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Insolvency Appellate Procedure International Cooperation on Evidence Letters of Request Mutual Arrangement Disclosure +5 more

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tenwow International Holdings Limited (in liquidation)

1st Plaintiff

Nan Pu International Limited (in creditors' voluntary winding up)

2nd Plaintiff

PricewaterhouseCoopers (a firm)

1st Defendant

普华永道中天会计师事务所 (特殊普通合伙) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS ZHONG TIAN LLP

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Application for Leave to Appeal (decision Refusing Leave)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether a Letter of Request (LOR) may be issued to procure discovery
  3. 3 Whether the Mutual Arrangement (Art 6) applied

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal is refused because the proposed grounds lack merit and are improperly pleaded (argumentative repetition), the court correctly exercised its discretion in refusing the LOR absent evidence that the Mutual Arrangement applied or that the D2 documents were blanket-prohibited Regulated Information, and D2 failed to satisfy the Ladd v Marshall test for fresh evidence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused
  • Further stay of execution granted for 7 days to enable D2 to apply to the Court of Appeal