CAPITAL ACE HOLDINGS LTD. AND ANOTHER v. INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL NETWORK HOLDINGS LTD. AND OTHERS

CAPITAL ACE HOLDINGS LTD. AND ANOTHER v. INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL NETWORK HOLDINGS LTD. AND OTHERS

The application to continue the ex parte injunction was refused because, although the plaintiff established a serious question to be tried and balance of convenience arguably favoured continuation, the court properly required a personal undertaking from the individuals behind the company in the circumstances and those individuals (Hui and Lui) refused to give the undertaking; refusal to provide the required undertaking made continuation inappropriate.

Citation
CAPITAL ACE HOLDINGS LTD. AND ANOTHER v. INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL NETWORK HOLDINGS LTD. AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff (hca 1842/2002) and 1st Defendant (hca 2066/2002): INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL NETWORK HOLDINGS LIMITED; 1st Defendant (hca 1842/2002) and 1st Plaintiff (hca 2066/2002): CAPITAL ACE HOLDINGS LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (hca 1842/2002) and 2nd Plaintiff (hca 2066/2002): WISE EXPRESS ASSETS LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (hca 2066/2002): HUI CHUEN KIN DANIEL; 3rd Defendant (hca 2066/2002): LUI BING KIN MICHAEL; 4th Defendant (hca 2066/2002): LO WING YAN WILLIAM; 5th Defendant (hca 2066/2002): WONG WAI HO; Petitioner for Winding Up (mentioned): INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 September 2002
Case Number
HCA2066/2002
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application to Continue Ex Parte Injunction / Decision on Application to Continue or Discharge Ex Parte Injunction Pending Trial
Outcome
Application to continue ex parte injunction refused
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Undertaking as to Damages, Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications, Breach of Takeover Code, S.26 a Securities and Futures Commission Ordinance
Source Language
EN
Company Law Securities Regulation Equity Injunctions Takeover Law Interlocutory Injunction Undertaking as to Damages Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications Breach of Takeover Code +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL NETWORK HOLDINGS LIMITED

Plaintiff (hca 1842/2002) and 1st Defendant (hca 2066/2002)

CAPITAL ACE HOLDINGS LIMITED

1st Defendant (hca 1842/2002) and 1st Plaintiff (hca 2066/2002)

WISE EXPRESS ASSETS LIMITED

2nd Defendant (hca 1842/2002) and 2nd Plaintiff (hca 2066/2002)

HUI CHUEN KIN DANIEL

2nd Defendant (hca 2066/2002)

LUI BING KIN MICHAEL

3rd Defendant (hca 2066/2002)

LO WING YAN WILLIAM

4th Defendant (hca 2066/2002)

WONG WAI HO

5th Defendant (hca 2066/2002)

INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL LIMITED

Petitioner for Winding Up (mentioned)

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application to Continue Ex Parte Injunction / Decision on Application to Continue or Discharge Ex Parte Injunction Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a serious question to be tried
  2. 2 Whether material non-disclosure vitiates the ex parte order
  3. 3 Whether balance of convenience favours continuation of injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The application to continue the ex parte injunction was refused because, although the plaintiff established a serious question to be tried and balance of convenience arguably favoured continuation, the court properly required a personal undertaking from the individuals behind the company in the circumstances and those individuals (Hui and Lui) refused to give the undertaking; refusal to provide the required undertaking made continuation inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Application to continue ex parte injunction refused

Orders

  • Application to continue the ex parte order dated 15 May 2002 refused
  • Hearing dates in January 2003 vacated