SUN YAN v. SUPERB JADE LTD AND OTHERS

SUN YAN v. SUPERB JADE LTD AND OTHERS

The applicants failed to prove a real likelihood of substantial loss from the Mareva injunction; although the plaintiff is essentially a foreign plaintiff with only a flimsy connection to Hong Kong (which in principle justifies fortification), the existing fortification of $1,000,000 already paid is adequate protection; accordingly the application for further fortification is dismissed and the applicants ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs (order nisi).

Citation
SUN YAN v. SUPERB JADE LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff (by Original Action); 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim): Sun Yan; 1st Defendant (by Original Action); 1st Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): Superb Jade Limited; 2nd Defendant (by Original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): Lin Li Dong; 2nd Defendant by Counterclaim: Shenyin Wanguo Securities (HK) Limited; 3rd Defendant by Counterclaim: Shum Lai Na; 3rd Defendant (by Original Action): Tang Jing
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 October 2015
Case Number
HCA813/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Injunction Proceedings (mareva Injunction) With Counterclaim and Interlocutory Application for Further Fortification / Interlocutory Hearing and Decision on Summons for Further Fortification and Related Orders
Outcome
Application for further fortification dismissed; order nisi that 1st and 2nd Defendants pay the Plaintiff's costs; prior gagging order was discharged by consent
Legal Topics
Mareva Injunction, Fortification/security for Injunction, Nominee/trust Arrangements, Asset Tracing, Cross Border Enforcement
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Injunctions Trusts Company Law Commercial Fraud Asset Tracing Mareva Injunction Fortification/security for Injunction +2 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sun Yan

Plaintiff (by Original Action); 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim)

Superb Jade Limited

1st Defendant (by Original Action); 1st Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

Lin Li Dong

2nd Defendant (by Original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

Shenyin Wanguo Securities (HK) Limited

2nd Defendant by Counterclaim

Shum Lai Na

3rd Defendant by Counterclaim

Tang Jing

3rd Defendant (by Original Action)

Procedural Posture

Civil Injunction Proceedings (mareva Injunction) With Counterclaim and Interlocutory Application for Further Fortification / Interlocutory Hearing and Decision on Summons for Further Fortification and Related Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st and 2nd Defendants are entitled to further fortification/security for the Mareva injunction
  2. 2 Whether the merit of the plaintiff's case undermines or precludes further fortification
  3. 3 Whether there is a real likelihood of substantial loss to the applicants from being restrained from trading the SWS Account

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to prove a real likelihood of substantial loss from the Mareva injunction; although the plaintiff is essentially a foreign plaintiff with only a flimsy connection to Hong Kong (which in principle justifies fortification), the existing fortification of $1,000,000 already paid is adequate protection; accordingly the application for further fortification is dismissed and the applicants ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs (order nisi).

Court Disposition

Application for further fortification dismissed; order nisi that 1st and 2nd Defendants pay the Plaintiff's costs; prior gagging order was discharged by consent

Orders

  • Application of the 1st and 2nd Defendants by Original Action for further fortification dismissed.
  • Order nisi that the 1st and 2nd Defendants by Original Action shall pay the costs of the Plaintiff by Original Action.