SERES PROPERTIES B.V. v. LEE HOCK PUN AND ANOTHER

SERES PROPERTIES B.V. v. LEE HOCK PUN AND ANOTHER

The Default Judgment was irregular because service by insertion in the letter box under O.10 r.1(2) required the defendant to be within the jurisdiction when the writ was served and the evidence established D1 was not; the consent order did not preclude D1 from pursuing a direct challenge to the validity of the Default Judgment and there was no abuse of process or prejudice warranting retention of the irregular judgment, therefore the Default Judgment must be set aside ex debito justitiae and related enforcement measures founded on it (charging order, attempted discharge) fall away.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 5750
Parties
Plaintiff: SERES PROPERTIES B.V.; 1st Defendant: LEE HOCK PUN; 2nd Defendant: WANG XULU
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 November 2025
Case Number
HCA1287/2022
Procedural Posture
Enforcement of Guarantee / Debt Recovery / Hearing on Set Aside Summons and Related Applications (discharge of Injunction, Charging Order, Relief From Sanction)
Outcome
Default Judgment set aside; Relief Summons and Discharge Summons dismissed; Amended Charging Order nisi set aside and application to make it absolute dismissed; injunction remains in place; costs orders made as set out
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Service of Process, Setting Aside Judgment, Mareva Injunction, Charging Order, Consent Order, Abuse of Process, Relief From Sanctions
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Enforcement Injunctions Contract Law Company Law Default Judgment Service of Process Setting Aside Judgment +5 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SERES PROPERTIES B.V.

Plaintiff

LEE HOCK PUN

1st Defendant

WANG XULU

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Enforcement of Guarantee / Debt Recovery / Hearing on Set Aside Summons and Related Applications (discharge of Injunction, Charging Order, Relief From Sanction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the default judgment was irregular due to improper service of the writ
  2. 2 Whether the defendant was entitled as of right to have the default judgment set aside
  3. 3 Whether the consent order barred the defendant from pursuing a fresh setting aside application or rendered that application an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The Default Judgment was irregular because service by insertion in the letter box under O.10 r.1(2) required the defendant to be within the jurisdiction when the writ was served and the evidence established D1 was not; the consent order did not preclude D1 from pursuing a direct challenge to the validity of the Default Judgment and there was no abuse of process or prejudice warranting retention of the irregular judgment, therefore the Default Judgment must be set aside ex debito justitiae and related enforcement measures founded on it (charging order, attempted discharge) fall away.

Court Disposition

Default Judgment set aside; Relief Summons and Discharge Summons dismissed; Amended Charging Order nisi set aside and application to make it absolute dismissed; injunction remains in place; costs orders made as set out

Orders

  • Set aside the Default Judgment in the amount of 03,628,157.97
  • Dismiss the Relief Summons dated 9 January 2025