CWG v. MH AND OTHERS

CWG v. MH AND OTHERS

The court exercised its discretion to lift any implied undertaking as to the two anonymised judgments for limited use in the specified bankruptcy/enforcement proceedings because (1) the judgments were already anonymised and PD15.15 contemplates publication subject to redaction, (2) enforcement of the Costs Order is a legitimate, non-collateral purpose, (3) the Applying Rs offered strict undertakings limiting use and access, and (4) no sufficient prejudice to opposing parties was shown; release approved subject to undertakings and cost orders.

Citation
CWG v. MH AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant (wife): CWG; 1st Respondent (husband): MH; 2nd Respondent: WH; 3rd Respondent: MVF LIMITED; 4th Respondent: WM; 5th Respondent: EH; 6th Respondent: LS LIMITED; 7th Respondent: BM
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 December 2016
Case Number
HCMP643/2012
Procedural Posture
Part IIA Matrimonial Financial Relief (mppo) With Related Enforcement/bankruptcy Proceedings / Interlocutory Chamber Decision on Summons for Release of Judgments for Use in Bankruptcy Proceedings (application for Implied Undertaking to Be Lifted)
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Publication of Judgments, Implied Undertaking, Use of Court Judgments in Enforcement Proceedings, Anonymisation and Redaction Under Practice Direction Pd15.15, Costs Orders and Enforcement
Source Language
EN
Family Law Civil Procedure Bankruptcy Law Judicial Administration/open Justice Confidentiality Law Publication of Judgments Implied Undertaking Use of Court Judgments in Enforcement Proceedings +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CWG

Applicant (wife)

MH

1st Respondent (husband)

WH

2nd Respondent

MVF LIMITED

3rd Respondent

WM

4th Respondent

EH

5th Respondent

LS LIMITED

6th Respondent

BM

7th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Part IIA Matrimonial Financial Relief (mppo) With Related Enforcement/bankruptcy Proceedings / Interlocutory Chamber Decision on Summons for Release of Judgments for Use in Bankruptcy Proceedings (application for Implied Undertaking to Be Lifted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Part IIA proceedings are caught by JPRRO s3(1)(b) restrictions on publication
  2. 2 Whether anonymised judgments can be released for use in related bankruptcy/enforcement proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the implied undertaking prevents use of judgments for collateral purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to lift any implied undertaking as to the two anonymised judgments for limited use in the specified bankruptcy/enforcement proceedings because (1) the judgments were already anonymised and PD15.15 contemplates publication subject to redaction, (2) enforcement of the Costs Order is a legitimate, non-collateral purpose, (3) the Applying Rs offered strict undertakings limiting use and access, and (4) no sufficient prejudice to opposing parties was shown; release approved subject to undertakings and cost orders.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • The Judgment dated 26 March 2013 and the Ruling dated 26 September 2013 in HCMP 643/2012 (the '2 Judgments') are released to the 5th and 6th Respondents (EH and LS Limited) for use in HCSD 19/2016 upon the undertaking that they will use the 2 Judgments only in HCSD 19/2016
  • The 5th and 6th Respondents must ensure only the Judge in HCSD 19/2016, the 1st Respondent, the 5th and 6th Respondents and their respective legal representatives may read the 2 Judgments