KUN PENG I LTD AND ANOTHER v. WIN POWER INVESTMENT LTD AND OTHERS

KUN PENG I LTD AND ANOTHER v. WIN POWER INVESTMENT LTD AND OTHERS

On the limited evidence before the court the applicant did not establish that the negative covenant in clause 6.5 clearly applied to the 2nd defendant's claim or that there was a breach or threatened breach justifying an immediate interim injunction; there is at most a serious question to be tried and the summons for injunction must be adjourned for evidence and fuller argument.

Citation
KUN PENG I LTD AND ANOTHER v. WIN POWER INVESTMENT LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: KUN PENG I LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: KUN PENG II LIMITED; 1st Defendant: WIN POWER INVESTMENT LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: LIN MING; 3rd Defendant: JOINTA LIMITED; 4th Defendant: FUJIAN YUANSHENG FOODS INDUSTRY CO LTD
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 March 2012
Case Number
HCA475/2012
Procedural Posture
High Court Civil Action (contract/injunction) / Interlocutory Application for Injunction (adjourned); Concurrent Order 14 Summary Judgment Application in Related Proceedings
Outcome
Summons for injunction adjourned; no immediate interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Negative Covenant, Interim Injunction, Summary Judgment (order 14), Breach of Covenant, Termination of Contractual Obligations, Balance of Convenience, Serious Question to Be Tried
Source Language
EN
Contract Injunctions Civil Procedure Guarantee and Suretyship Company Law Negative Covenant Interim Injunction Summary Judgment (order 14) +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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KUN PENG I LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

KUN PENG II LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

WIN POWER INVESTMENT LIMITED

1st Defendant

LIN MING

2nd Defendant

JOINTA LIMITED

3rd Defendant

FUJIAN YUANSHENG FOODS INDUSTRY CO LTD

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Civil Action (contract/injunction) / Interlocutory Application for Injunction (adjourned); Concurrent Order 14 Summary Judgment Application in Related Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction should be granted to restrain the 2nd defendant from pursuing HCA 866/2011 in breach of clause 6.5 of the Agreement
  2. 2 Whether clause 6.5 (and clause 26.1(D) termination) applies to the 2nd defendant's claimed debt
  3. 3 Whether there is a serious question to be tried and whether KP would suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction

Ratio Decidendi

On the limited evidence before the court the applicant did not establish that the negative covenant in clause 6.5 clearly applied to the 2nd defendant's claim or that there was a breach or threatened breach justifying an immediate interim injunction; there is at most a serious question to be tried and the summons for injunction must be adjourned for evidence and fuller argument.

Court Disposition

Summons for injunction adjourned; no immediate interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Summons for injunction adjourned
  • No immediate interim injunction granted