BANCA POPOLARE DI VICENZA SOC COOP AND ANOTHER v. ALUTECH (FAR EAST) CO LTD AND OTHERS

BANCA POPOLARE DI VICENZA SOC COOP AND ANOTHER v. ALUTECH (FAR EAST) CO LTD AND OTHERS

The court continued and varied the injunctions as sought by the plaintiffs (paragraphs 1–6), refused the 1st and 4th defendants' request to withdraw living and legal expenses because entitlement ended upon entry of judgment and no evidence of necessary incurred expenses was produced, and dismissed the defendants'...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
BANCA POPOLARE DI VICENZA SOC COOP AND ANOTHER v. ALUTECH (FAR EAST) CO LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: BANCA POPOLARE DI VICENZA SOC COOP; 2nd Plaintiff: LLOYD ADRIATICO SPA; 1st Defendant: ALUTECH (FAR EAST) COMPANY LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: WALL STREET EXCHANGE LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: LOCSIN ANNA ABELIA SAMSON; 4th Defendant: LO TO SANG; 5th Defendant: PAUL JAMES GRANT
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
8 August 2008
Case Number
HCA1973/2007
Procedural Posture
Commercial Civil Action Involving Mareva Injunctions and Summary Judgment / Hearing and Judgment on Plaintiffs' Summons to Continue Injunctions and Defendants' Applications for Stay of Execution (first Instance)
Outcome
Plaintiffs' summons granted in part: injunctions continued and varied; defendants' applications to withdraw expenses refused; defendants' summons for stay of execution dismissed.
Legal Topics
Mareva Injunction, Continuation and Variation of Injunctions, Stay of Execution Pending Appeal, Garnishee Order, Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Injunctions Enforcement Commercial Law Appeals Mareva Injunction Continuation and Variation of Injunctions Stay of Execution Pending Appeal +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BANCA POPOLARE DI VICENZA SOC COOP

1st Plaintiff

LLOYD ADRIATICO SPA

2nd Plaintiff

ALUTECH (FAR EAST) COMPANY LIMITED

1st Defendant

WALL STREET EXCHANGE LIMITED

2nd Defendant

LOCSIN ANNA ABELIA SAMSON

3rd Defendant

LO TO SANG

4th Defendant

PAUL JAMES GRANT

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Civil Action Involving Mareva Injunctions and Summary Judgment / Hearing and Judgment on Plaintiffs' Summons to Continue Injunctions and Defendants' Applications for Stay of Execution (first Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs' prior injunctions should be continued and varied
  2. 2 Whether 1st and 4th defendants remain entitled to withdraw living and legal expenses after judgment
  3. 3 Whether stay of execution pending appeal should be granted because appeal would be rendered nugatory

Ratio Decidendi

The court continued and varied the injunctions as sought by the plaintiffs (paragraphs 1–6), refused the 1st and 4th defendants' request to withdraw living and legal expenses because entitlement ended upon entry of judgment and no evidence of necessary incurred expenses was produced, and dismissed the defendants' summons for a stay of execution pending appeal because there were no strong grounds of appeal and the risk of rendering the appeal nugatory was minimal; costs awarded to plaintiffs, to be taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' summons granted in part: injunctions continued and varied; defendants' applications to withdraw expenses refused; defendants' summons for stay of execution dismissed.

Orders

  • Continuation and variation of injunction order in terms of paragraphs 1 to 6 as sought by the plaintiffs
  • Refusal of 1st and 4th defendants' request to withdraw living and legal expenses under the Mareva injunction