CHEUNG HING v. WONG CHOR CHEUNG AND ANOTHER

CHEUNG HING v. WONG CHOR CHEUNG AND ANOTHER

The court has jurisdiction under s21L(1) and Order 29 r1 to grant post-judgment interlocutory injunctions and ancillary disclosure orders necessary for the administration of justice; plaintiff had sufficient locus and a serious issue to be tried and the balance of convenience favoured injunctive relief to prevent irreparable harm from further encumbrances, therefore the injunction and disclosure orders sought in paragraphs 1-6 and 8 of the 2nd Summons were granted with costs.

Citation
CHEUNG HING v. WONG CHOR CHEUNG AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Cheung Hing; 1st Defendant: Wong Chor Cheung; 2nd Defendant: Wah Fung Forest Resources Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 August 2015
Case Number
HCA336/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (trust/proprietary/derivative/injunction) / Interlocutory Applications (post Judgment Injunctions and Directions)
Outcome
Granted in part
Legal Topics
Constructive Trust, Derivative Action, Interlocutory Injunction, Disclosure Orders, Sale of Property, Lis Pendens, Security for Costs
Source Language
EN
Trusts Company Law Civil Procedure Equitable Remedies Property Law Constructive Trust Derivative Action Interlocutory Injunction +4 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cheung Hing

Plaintiff

Wong Chor Cheung

1st Defendant

Wah Fung Forest Resources Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (trust/proprietary/derivative/injunction) / Interlocutory Applications (post Judgment Injunctions and Directions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant post-judgment interlocutory injunctions ancillary to a consent order
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff had locus to seek injunctions and disclosure against defendants and the company
  3. 3 Whether the American Cyanamid test/no serious issue to be tried bars relief after a consent order

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction under s21L(1) and Order 29 r1 to grant post-judgment interlocutory injunctions and ancillary disclosure orders necessary for the administration of justice; plaintiff had sufficient locus and a serious issue to be tried and the balance of convenience favoured injunctive relief to prevent irreparable harm from further encumbrances, therefore the injunction and disclosure orders sought in paragraphs 1-6 and 8 of the 2nd Summons were granted with costs.

Court Disposition

Granted in part

Orders

  • Order granted in terms of paragraphs 1-6 and 8 of the plaintiff's 2nd Summons (injunctive and disclosure reliefs)
  • Defendants to pay plaintiff's costs of and incidental to the 2nd Summons, to be taxed and paid forthwith