SOUTH CHINA MEDIA LTD AND ANOTHER v. MEN\'S UNO INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING LTD AND ANOTHER

SOUTH CHINA MEDIA LTD AND ANOTHER v. MEN\'S UNO INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING LTD AND ANOTHER

The application was refused because although there were arguable factual disputes, the plaintiffs' cause against the 1st Defendant was weak (imputation of knowledge doubtful; key employee resigned before company existed; alter ego not pleaded), the plaintiffs unjustifiably delayed causing prejudice to defendants who had already progressed launch preparations, the covenants were of excessive scope and duration, and the balance of convenience favored refusal; costs ordered against plaintiffs.

Citation
SOUTH CHINA MEDIA LTD AND ANOTHER v. MEN\'S UNO INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: South China Media Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: South China Media Management Limited; 1st Defendant: Men S Uno International Publishing Limited; 2nd Defendant: Leung Mabel
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 March 2003
Case Number
HCA769/2003
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Injunction Application (civil) / Inter Partes Hearing in Court of First Instance (application Refused)
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction application refused
Legal Topics
Procuring Breach of Contract, Non Solicitation, Restraint of Trade, Interlocutory Injunction, Alter Ego/corporate Veil, Delay (laches), Balance of Convenience
Source Language
EN
Contract Employment Equity Injunction Civil Procedure Procuring Breach of Contract Non Solicitation Restraint of Trade +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 6 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South China Media Limited

1st Plaintiff

South China Media Management Limited

2nd Plaintiff

Men S Uno International Publishing Limited

1st Defendant

Leung Mabel

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Injunction Application (civil) / Inter Partes Hearing in Court of First Instance (application Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a serious question to be tried
  2. 2 Whether the 1st Defendant can be liable for procuring breach of contract
  3. 3 Whether knowledge of employee's restrictive covenant can be imputed to the 1st Defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because although there were arguable factual disputes, the plaintiffs' cause against the 1st Defendant was weak (imputation of knowledge doubtful; key employee resigned before company existed; alter ego not pleaded), the plaintiffs unjustifiably delayed causing prejudice to defendants who had already progressed launch preparations, the covenants were of excessive scope and duration, and the balance of convenience favored refusal; costs ordered against plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction application refused

Orders

  • Application for interlocutory injunction refused
  • Costs to be paid by the Plaintiffs to the 1st Defendant, to be taxed if not agreed and paid forthwith