MAJESTIC PLAN INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS v. JI CHANGQUN
The court refused an unconditional stay because the defendant failed to demonstrate an overwhelmingly strong appeal or cogent evidence of irreparable deleterious effect; however, to balance interests and minimize prejudice to the successful plaintiffs, the court granted a stay of execution pending the appeal on the condition that the principal sums and accrued pre-judgment interest be paid into court within 21 days; costs ordered in the cause up to 13 February 2026 and defendant to pay plaintiffs' costs after that date, subject to summary assessment; defendant must lodge opposition to costs within prescribed timeframes.
- Citation
- [2026] HKCFI 1755
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff: Majestic Plan International Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Profit Reach Ventures Limited; 3rd Plaintiff: Digital King Investments Limited; Defendant: Defendant
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 1 April 2026
- Case Number
- HCA1494/2019
- Procedural Posture
- High Court (court of First Instance) Action No.1494/2019 Civil Money Claim / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal (post Judgment)
- Outcome
- Stay of execution granted conditionally pending determination of appeal CACV 47/2026 upon payment into court of specified sums within 21 days; costs order nisi made as to costs allocation
- Legal Topics
- Consideration, Stay of Execution Pending Appeal, Forbearance to Sue, Contractual Interpretation, Security for Judgment, Pre Judgment Interest
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Majestic Plan International Limited
1st Plaintiff
Profit Reach Ventures Limited
2nd Plaintiff
Digital King Investments Limited
3rd Plaintiff
Defendant
Defendant
Procedural Posture
High Court (court of First Instance) Action No.1494/2019 Civil Money Claim / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal (post Judgment)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the MOU is supported by valid consideration
- 2 Whether plaintiffs' forbearance to sue constituted valid consideration causally connected to the defendant's request
- 3 Whether the defendant demonstrated a sufficiently strong or arguable appeal to justify a stay
Ratio Decidendi
The court refused an unconditional stay because the defendant failed to demonstrate an overwhelmingly strong appeal or cogent evidence of irreparable deleterious effect; however, to balance interests and minimize prejudice to the successful plaintiffs, the court granted a stay of execution pending the appeal on the condition that the principal sums and accrued pre-judgment interest be paid into court within 21 days; costs ordered in the cause up to 13 February 2026 and defendant to pay plaintiffs' costs after that date, subject to summary assessment; defendant must lodge opposition to costs within prescribed timeframes.
Court Disposition
Stay of execution granted conditionally pending determination of appeal CACV 47/2026 upon payment into court of specified sums within 21 days; costs order nisi made as to costs allocation
Orders
- Execution of the order in respect of the Judgment stayed pending determination of the Defendant's appeal CACV 47/2026 upon condition that the principal sums of HK$452,327,853.95 and HK$408,761,575.92, together with pre-judgment interest of HK$189,207,398.11 and HK$187,351,007.73, be paid into court within 21 days
- Costs incurred by the parties on and prior to 13 February 2026 to be in the cause of the appeal in CACV 47/2026
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment