NICHOLAS PAPPADIS AND ANOTHER v. CHAN SHING SHEUNG BARRY AND OTHERS

NICHOLAS PAPPADIS AND ANOTHER v. CHAN SHING SHEUNG BARRY AND OTHERS

Committal can only be sustained where procedural prerequisites (timely service and appropriate penal notice) are met or where the individual had notice and actively aided or procured the breach; applying these principles the court found the third respondent (director) liable for deliberate non-disclosure of bank accounts and for instrumental involvement in dealing with the 3-million joint venture share certificates despite imperfect formal service but with dispensation on notice grounds, and found the second respondent (general manager) liable for failing to take reasonable steps to ensure full disclosure; the first respondent was not proved an officer nor proved to have aided and abetted...

Citation
NICHOLAS PAPPADIS AND ANOTHER v. CHAN SHING SHEUNG BARRY AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Applicant: Nicholas Pappadis; 2nd Applicant: Pappadis Electronics Ltd; 1st Respondent: Chan Shing Sheung Barry; 2nd Respondent: Norman Jarrett; 3rd Respondent: Cris Chiu-Yin Yip
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 January 1989
Case Number
HCMP2005/1988
Procedural Posture
High Court Committal for Contempt Arising From Mareva Injunction and Disclosure Orders / Judgment (post Hearing)
Outcome
Court found: 3rd respondent (Cris Chiu-Yin Yip) in contempt for deliberate non-disclosure of bank accounts and for instrumental involvement in dealing with the 3-million joint venture share certificates; 2nd respondent (Norman Jarrett) in contempt as officer for failure to take reasonable steps to secure full...
Legal Topics
Committal, Disclosure Orders, Service and Penal Notice, Aiding and Abetting, Officers' Liability, Lodging of Share Certificates, Letter of Hypothecation
Source Language
EN
Contempt of Court Company Law Civil Procedure Equity Injunctions (mareva / Freezing Orders) Committal Disclosure Orders Service and Penal Notice +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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicholas Pappadis

1st Applicant

Pappadis Electronics Ltd

2nd Applicant

Chan Shing Sheung Barry

1st Respondent

Norman Jarrett

2nd Respondent

Cris Chiu-Yin Yip

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

High Court Committal for Contempt Arising From Mareva Injunction and Disclosure Orders / Judgment (post Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HKLSD failed to comply with mandatory disclosure and lodging orders
  2. 2 Whether respondents aided and abetted or caused HKLSD to breach the prohibitory Mareva injunction by dealing with joint venture shares
  3. 3 Whether service and indorsed penal notices were adequate to sustain personal committal proceedings against individual respondents

Ratio Decidendi

Committal can only be sustained where procedural prerequisites (timely service and appropriate penal notice) are met or where the individual had notice and actively aided or procured the breach; applying these principles the court found the third respondent (director) liable for deliberate non-disclosure of bank accounts and for instrumental involvement in dealing with the 3-million joint venture share certificates despite imperfect formal service but with dispensation on notice grounds, and found the second respondent (general manager) liable for failing to take reasonable steps to ensure full disclosure; the first respondent was not proved an officer nor proved to have aided and abetted...

Court Disposition

Court found: 3rd respondent (Cris Chiu-Yin Yip) in contempt for deliberate non-disclosure of bank accounts and for instrumental involvement in dealing with the 3-million joint venture share certificates; 2nd respondent (Norman Jarrett) in contempt as officer for failure to take reasonable steps to secure full...

Orders

  • Findings of contempt entered against Cris Chiu-Yin Yip for non-disclosure and for involvement in dealing with joint venture share certificates
  • Findings of contempt entered against Norman Jarrett for failure to ensure full disclosure