SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. YIN YINGNENG RICHARD AND OTHERS

SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. YIN YINGNENG RICHARD AND OTHERS

The summons was justified because of Wang's continuing executive role and the court's prior disapproval of the Company's corporate governance; Wang, having agreed the time frame, should have applied to the court with evidence for any extension, and therefore Wang must pay the SFC's costs (with a certificate for counsel) of the listed summonses, taxed if not agreed.

Citation
SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. YIN YINGNENG RICHARD AND OTHERS
Parties
Petitioner: Securities and Futures Commission; 1st Respondent: Yin Yingneng Richard; 2nd Respondent: Lee Yiu Sun; 3rd Respondent: Wang Wen Ming; 4th Respondent: First China Financial Network Holdings Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 September 2015
Case Number
HCMP2502/2012
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (section 214 Sfo) / Decision on Costs
Outcome
Costs awarded to the Securities and Futures Commission to be paid by Wang Wen Ming; no costs against Yin, Lee and the Company.
Legal Topics
Section 214 Securities and Futures Ordinance, Costs, Extension of Time, Directors' Duties and Corporate Governance
Source Language
EN
Securities Law Corporate Governance Costs and Taxation Civil Procedure Section 214 Securities and Futures Ordinance Costs Extension of Time Directors' Duties and Corporate Governance

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Securities and Futures Commission

Petitioner

Yin Yingneng Richard

1st Respondent

Lee Yiu Sun

2nd Respondent

Wang Wen Ming

3rd Respondent

First China Financial Network Holdings Limited

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings (section 214 Sfo) / Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the SFC was entitled to bring the summons challenging the extension agreement between Wang and the Company
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded and who should bear them
  3. 3 Whether Wang ought to have applied to the court for an extension of time with proper evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The summons was justified because of Wang's continuing executive role and the court's prior disapproval of the Company's corporate governance; Wang, having agreed the time frame, should have applied to the court with evidence for any extension, and therefore Wang must pay the SFC's costs (with a certificate for counsel) of the listed summonses, taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the Securities and Futures Commission to be paid by Wang Wen Ming; no costs against Yin, Lee and the Company.

Orders

  • Costs of the summons filed on 9 March 2015 and the consent summons filed on 21 April 2015 awarded to the Securities and Futures Commission, with a certificate for counsel, to be paid by Wang Wen Ming.
  • Such costs to be taxed if not agreed.