THE JOINT AND SEVERAL TRUSTEES OF THE PROPERTY OF CHAU CHAM WONG PATRICK, A BANKRUPT v. CHAU KAR HON QUINTON AND OTHERS

THE JOINT AND SEVERAL TRUSTEES OF THE PROPERTY OF CHAU CHAM WONG PATRICK, A BANKRUPT v. CHAU KAR HON QUINTON AND OTHERS

The Trustees failed to prove a real risk of dissipation by cogent evidence; delay and prior correspondence undermined the assertion of risk; in the absence of a demonstrated real risk of dissipation the Mareva injunction and ancillary disclosure order could not be granted, and the application was dismissed with...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
THE JOINT AND SEVERAL TRUSTEES OF THE PROPERTY OF CHAU CHAM WONG PATRICK, A BANKRUPT v. CHAU KAR HON QUINTON AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicants: The Joint and Several Trustees of the Property of Chau Cham Wong Patrick, a Bankrupt; 1st Respondent: Chau Kar Hon Quinton; 2nd Respondent: Vanessa; 3rd Respondent: Mary
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 June 2014
Case Number
HCB549/2012
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Proceedings (inter Partes Application for Mareva Injunction) / Interlocutory Application on Summons Dated 25 November 2013; Decision Delivered 25 March 2014
Outcome
Application for Mareva injunction dismissed; ancillary disclosure order refused; order nisi that costs of the application be to the Respondents
Legal Topics
Mareva Injunction, Freezing Order, Disclosure Order, Transactions at Undervalue (s49 Bo), Dissipation of Assets, Contempt
Source Language
en
Injunctions Bankruptcy Trusts and Equity Civil Procedure Mareva Injunction Freezing Order Disclosure Order Transactions at Undervalue (s49 Bo) +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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Joint and Several Trustees of the Property of Chau Cham Wong Patrick, a Bankrupt

Applicants

Chau Kar Hon Quinton

1st Respondent

Vanessa

2nd Respondent

Mary

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Proceedings (inter Partes Application for Mareva Injunction) / Interlocutory Application on Summons Dated 25 November 2013; Decision Delivered 25 March 2014

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trustees established a good arguable case
  2. 2 Whether there were insufficient assets within Hong Kong to satisfy the claim
  3. 3 Whether there existed assets outside the jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The Trustees failed to prove a real risk of dissipation by cogent evidence; delay and prior correspondence undermined the assertion of risk; in the absence of a demonstrated real risk of dissipation the Mareva injunction and ancillary disclosure order could not be granted, and the application was dismissed with costs to the Respondents.

Court Disposition

Application for Mareva injunction dismissed; ancillary disclosure order refused; order nisi that costs of the application be to the Respondents

Orders

  • Mareva injunction application dismissed
  • Ancillary disclosure order refused