JIN JIANG INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. 深圳市威廉金融控股有限公司 AND OTHERS

JIN JIANG INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. 深圳市威廉金融控股有限公司 AND OTHERS

Leave to intervene was granted for the CJ Parties but the application to vary the Injunction in respect of the State Frontier account was dismissed because the CJ Parties failed to prove a concluded agreement or entitlement to use State Frontier's assets to discharge Wang Xu's debt, there were material factual disputes (authenticity of letters, beneficial ownership, potential fraud/void transactions) requiring trial, and allowing the variation would risk facilitating evasion of justice contrary to the Mareva principles.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 3129
Parties
1st Plaintiff: JIN JIANG INVESTMENT LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: SHUM TIN CHING trading as CHUANGSHENG; 5th Defendant: WANG XU (王旭); 6th Defendant: STATE FRONTIER LIMITED (邦領有限公司); 3rd Intended Intervener / 3rd Intervener: CHANGJIANG SECURITIES BROKERAGE (HK) LIMITED (CJ Securities); 4th Intended Intervener / 4th Intervener: CHANGJIANG ASSET MANAGEMENT (HK) LIMITED (CJ Asset); 5th Intended Intervener / 5th Intervener: CHANGJIANG FINANCE (HK) LIMITED (CJ Finance)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 December 2023
Case Number
HCA196/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Application to Intervene and Vary Mareva/proprietary Injunction / Interlocutory Application to Vary Injunction and for Intervention (summons Hearing)
Outcome
Application to intervene granted; application to vary injunction allowed in respect of Wang Xu's own accounts with CJ Securities and CJ Asset (D5 variation) and dismissed in respect of State Frontier's account (D6 variation)
Legal Topics
Variation of Injunction, Intervention, Bona Fide Business Debt, Disputed Beneficial Ownership, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Fraud Injunctions (mareva/proprietary) Civil Procedure Property/trusts Variation of Injunction Intervention Bona Fide Business Debt Disputed Beneficial Ownership +1 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JIN JIANG INVESTMENT LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

SHUM TIN CHING trading as CHUANGSHENG

2nd Plaintiff

WANG XU (王旭)

5th Defendant

STATE FRONTIER LIMITED (邦領有限公司)

6th Defendant

CHANGJIANG SECURITIES BROKERAGE (HK) LIMITED (CJ Securities)

3rd Intended Intervener / 3rd Intervener

CHANGJIANG ASSET MANAGEMENT (HK) LIMITED (CJ Asset)

4th Intended Intervener / 4th Intervener

CHANGJIANG FINANCE (HK) LIMITED (CJ Finance)

5th Intended Intervener / 5th Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Application to Intervene and Vary Mareva/proprietary Injunction / Interlocutory Application to Vary Injunction and for Intervention (summons Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CJ Parties should be granted leave to intervene
  2. 2 Whether funds in State Frontier's account can be used to discharge Wang Xu's personal promissory note debt
  3. 3 Whether the 2 Letters constitute a concluded agreement authorising use of State Frontier's assets

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to intervene was granted for the CJ Parties but the application to vary the Injunction in respect of the State Frontier account was dismissed because the CJ Parties failed to prove a concluded agreement or entitlement to use State Frontier's assets to discharge Wang Xu's debt, there were material factual disputes (authenticity of letters, beneficial ownership, potential fraud/void transactions) requiring trial, and allowing the variation would risk facilitating evasion of justice contrary to the Mareva principles.

Court Disposition

Application to intervene granted; application to vary injunction allowed in respect of Wang Xu's own accounts with CJ Securities and CJ Asset (D5 variation) and dismissed in respect of State Frontier's account (D6 variation)

Orders

  • Leave granted to the 3rd-5th Intended Interveners to participate; 3rd Intended Intervener becomes 3rd Intervener; 4th Intended Intervener becomes 4th Intervener; 5th Intended Intervener becomes 5th Intervener
  • Paragraph 1 of the Injunction varied to permit withdrawal by the 3rd-5th Interveners of amounts standing to the credit, proceeds of securities and proceeds of bonds held in the 5th Defendant's accounts numbered 313 (with the 4th Intervener) and 1000028026 (with the 3rd Intervener) to discharge the 5th Defendant's...