LIT HEI KING AND ANOTHER v. TSE SHUK FONG AND ANOTHER

LIT HEI KING AND ANOTHER v. TSE SHUK FONG AND ANOTHER

Court found plaintiffs had shown a serious issue to be tried on the trust claim but dismissed preservation and proprietary injunction applications because plaintiffs failed to show that something ought to be done for security given adequate protection from defendants' substantial net property equity; balance of convenience favoured refusal; late expert reports and late affidavits were inadmissible for delay and prejudice; discovery orders under Order 24 r.10 were denied where pleadings did not make direct reference to documents or documents were not in defendants' custody.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 3315
Parties
1st Plaintiff (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020): Lee Chi Keung; 2nd Plaintiff (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020): Chan Shing; 1st Plaintiff (hca1881/2020): Lit Hei King; 1st Defendant (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020): Wong Chi Chin; 2nd Defendant (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020) and 1st Defendant (hca1881/2020): Tse Shuk Fong; 3rd Defendant / Company Holding G/f Ka Ming Building Property: Max Dragon International Investment Limited; Company Holding Fook on Mansion Property: Lucky Honest International Limited; Company Holding 1 3/f Ka Ming Building Properties: Mega Dragon International Investment Limited; Company Holding Hong Kong Industrial Building Property: Wisdom Well Investment Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 November 2022
Case Number
HCA1881/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil — Interlocutory Applications for Preservation Orders, Proprietary Injunctions, Discovery and Interim Relief / Hearing of Summonses for Interim Relief and Discovery (pre Trial Interlocutory Stage)
Outcome
All summonses dismissed; no preservation order, proprietary injunction, interim asset-preservation or discovery as sought; applications to adduce further expert evidence and further affidavits dismissed.
Legal Topics
Preservation Order, Proprietary Injunction, Discovery (order 24), Resulting/constructive Trust, Admission of Expert Evidence, Accounting
Source Language
EN
Company Law Trusts and Equity Civil Procedure Property Law Remedies Preservation Order Proprietary Injunction Discovery (order 24) +3 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Chi Keung

1st Plaintiff (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020)

Chan Shing

2nd Plaintiff (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020)

Lit Hei King

1st Plaintiff (hca1881/2020)

Wong Chi Chin

1st Defendant (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020)

Tse Shuk Fong

2nd Defendant (hca1878/2020; Hca1879/2020; Hca1880/2020) and 1st Defendant (hca1881/2020)

Max Dragon International Investment Limited

3rd Defendant / Company Holding G/f Ka Ming Building Property

Lucky Honest International Limited

Company Holding Fook on Mansion Property

Mega Dragon International Investment Limited

Company Holding 1 3/f Ka Ming Building Properties

Wisdom Well Investment Limited

Company Holding Hong Kong Industrial Building Property

Procedural Posture

Civil — Interlocutory Applications for Preservation Orders, Proprietary Injunctions, Discovery and Interim Relief / Hearing of Summonses for Interim Relief and Discovery (pre Trial Interlocutory Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs have proprietary interests in company-held land (resulting/constructive trust)
  2. 2 Whether to grant preservation order to pay rents into court
  3. 3 Whether to grant proprietary injunction restraining disposal of rental income

Ratio Decidendi

Court found plaintiffs had shown a serious issue to be tried on the trust claim but dismissed preservation and proprietary injunction applications because plaintiffs failed to show that something ought to be done for security given adequate protection from defendants' substantial net property equity; balance of convenience favoured refusal; late expert reports and late affidavits were inadmissible for delay and prejudice; discovery orders under Order 24 r.10 were denied where pleadings did not make direct reference to documents or documents were not in defendants' custody.

Court Disposition

All summonses dismissed; no preservation order, proprietary injunction, interim asset-preservation or discovery as sought; applications to adduce further expert evidence and further affidavits dismissed.

Orders

  • Summonses filed in HCMP1878/2020, HCMP1879/2020, HCMP1880/2020 and HCMP1881/2020 dismissed
  • Plaintiffs' applications to adduce Ernst & Young fund-tracing expert reports dismissed