LEE CHI KEUNG AND OTHERS v. WONG CHI CHIN AND OTHERS

LEE CHI KEUNG AND OTHERS v. WONG CHI CHIN AND OTHERS

The court dismissed the plaintiffs' interlocutory applications because (1) although there was a serious issue to be tried on the trust claim, plaintiffs failed to show that something ought to be done to secure the property/funds given the substantial net equity in the properties which adequately protected plaintiffs...

Source-derived case information.

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
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 November 2022
Case Number
HCA1879/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Interlocutory Applications (preservation Order, Proprietary Injunction, Discovery, Interim Relief) / Hearing of Summonses at Interlocutory Stage
Outcome
All summonses dismissed
Legal Topics
Preservation Order, Proprietary Injunction, Resulting/constructive Trust, Discovery Under Order 24, Admission of Expert Evidence, Accounting, Costs
Source Language
en
Trusts Company Law Civil Procedure Injunctions Property Law Discovery Equitable Remedies Preservation Order +6 more

Source-derived case record

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
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)

Procedural Posture

Civil Interlocutory Applications (preservation Order, Proprietary Injunction, Discovery, Interim Relief) / Hearing of Summonses at Interlocutory Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs established a serious issue to be tried on proprietary/trust claims
  2. 2 Whether a preservation order or proprietary injunction should be granted
  3. 3 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy and whether something ought to be done to secure the property/funds

Ratio Decidendi

The court dismissed the plaintiffs' interlocutory applications because (1) although there was a serious issue to be tried on the trust claim, plaintiffs failed to show that something ought to be done to secure the property/funds given the substantial net equity in the properties which adequately protected plaintiffs financially; (2) proprietary injunction and preservation orders were discretionary and would risk greater injustice and disputes in enforcement; (3) expert fund‑tracing reports were excluded as inexcusably late and prejudicial; (4) discovery under Order 24 r.10 was not engaged where pleadings did not directly allude to documents; (5) defendants' applications to adduce further...

Court Disposition

All summonses dismissed

Orders

  • All summonses filed in HCMP1878/2020, HCMP1879/2020, HCMP1880/2020 and HCMP1881/2020 dismissed
  • Plaintiffs' applications to admit Ernst & Young fund‑tracing expert reports dismissed as inexcusable late