WHARF LTD AND OTHERS v. LAU YUEN HOW AND OTHERS

WHARF LTD AND OTHERS v. LAU YUEN HOW AND OTHERS

The court granted the plaintiffs' s21 application in principle on relevance grounds: the specified accounts were prima facie recipient accounts for the alleged misappropriations and the inspection is necessary to trace and preserve assets; disclosure is ordered for the period 13 May 2004 to 17 August 2008 subject to plaintiffs' undertaking to use materials only for these proceedings, banks to be reimbursed costs initially shared equally by parties, and plaintiffs to have costs of the application nisi against defendants.

Citation
WHARF LTD AND OTHERS v. LAU YUEN HOW AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: WHARF LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: WHEELOCK CORPORATE SERVICES LIMITED; 3rd Plaintiff: MARCO POLO HOTELS MANAGEMENT LIMITED; 1st Defendant: LAU YUEN HOW; 2nd Defendant: LIU CHO CHING; 3rd Defendant: LAU HEUNG KIU
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 January 2009
Case Number
HCA1535/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Mareva Injunction, Tracing and Proprietary Remedies / Interlocutory Application (chambers) for Inspection Under S21 Evidence Ordinance
Outcome
Application allowed in principle with limitations and conditions
Legal Topics
Mareva Injunction, Bankers' Books Inspection (s21 Evidence Ordinance), Tracing, Constructive Trust, Discovery, Right Against Self Incrimination
Source Language
EN
Civil Law Equity Injunctions Evidence Banking Law Trusts and Fiduciary Duty Mareva Injunction Bankers' Books Inspection (s21 Evidence Ordinance) +4 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WHARF LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

WHEELOCK CORPORATE SERVICES LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

MARCO POLO HOTELS MANAGEMENT LIMITED

3rd Plaintiff

LAU YUEN HOW

1st Defendant

LIU CHO CHING

2nd Defendant

LAU HEUNG KIU

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Mareva Injunction, Tracing and Proprietary Remedies / Interlocutory Application (chambers) for Inspection Under S21 Evidence Ordinance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an order under s21 Evidence Ordinance should be made to inspect and copy bankers' records
  2. 2 Appropriate temporal scope of the inspection order
  3. 3 Whether the order amounts to a fishing expedition or is oppressive

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the plaintiffs' s21 application in principle on relevance grounds: the specified accounts were prima facie recipient accounts for the alleged misappropriations and the inspection is necessary to trace and preserve assets; disclosure is ordered for the period 13 May 2004 to 17 August 2008 subject to plaintiffs' undertaking to use materials only for these proceedings, banks to be reimbursed costs initially shared equally by parties, and plaintiffs to have costs of the application nisi against defendants.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in principle with limitations and conditions

Orders

  • Order that plaintiffs may inspect and take copies of entries in the specified bankers' records concerning the listed accounts and any other accounts of which the defendants are sole or joint signatories for the period 13 May 2004 to 17 August 2008
  • Plaintiffs to give an undertaking that the information disclosed will be used only for the purposes of these proceedings unless compelled by court order