LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING GROUP HOLDINGS LTD v. ZHANG LAN

LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING GROUP HOLDINGS LTD v. ZHANG LAN

Because the defendant's breach was deliberate, intentional and continuing, she refused to attend the penalty hearing and gave no explanation or offer to purge contempt, and because the breach related to substantial undisclosed assets in the context of a Mareva injunction protecting a claim of US$286,815,887, the court concluded that alternatives (suspended sentence, sequestration, fine) were inappropriate and that an immediate custodial sentence of 12 months, together with committal and warrant, was necessary to enforce the order and uphold the administration of justice; costs ordered on an indemnity basis with certificate for 3 counsel.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 618
Parties
Plaintiff (hcmp 585/2017): LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING COMPANY LIMITED; Plaintiff (hcmp 586/2017): LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED; Defendant: ZHANG LAN
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 March 2019
Case Number
HCMP586/2017
Procedural Posture
Committal Application for Contempt in Aid of Mareva Injunction and Disclosure Order / Penalty Hearing / Sentencing (committal and Consequential Orders)
Outcome
Immediate custodial sentence of 12 months; Order for Committal granted; Warrant for Committal granted; costs to plaintiffs on an indemnity basis with certificate for 3 counsel.
Legal Topics
Committal, Custodial Sentence, Warrant for Committal, Costs on Indemnity Basis, Sequestration, Suspended Sentence, Fine
Source Language
EN
Contempt of Court Injunctions (mareva) Disclosure Orders Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Arbitration Committal Custodial Sentence +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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING COMPANY LIMITED

Plaintiff (hcmp 585/2017)

LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED

Plaintiff (hcmp 586/2017)

ZHANG LAN

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Application for Contempt in Aid of Mareva Injunction and Disclosure Order / Penalty Hearing / Sentencing (committal and Consequential Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an immediate custodial sentence is appropriate for contempt for breach of a Mareva injunction and disclosure order
  2. 2 Whether alternatives to immediate imprisonment (suspended sentence, sequestration, fine) are appropriate
  3. 3 Effect of defendant's non‑attendance, lack of apology and continuing breach on sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

Because the defendant's breach was deliberate, intentional and continuing, she refused to attend the penalty hearing and gave no explanation or offer to purge contempt, and because the breach related to substantial undisclosed assets in the context of a Mareva injunction protecting a claim of US$286,815,887, the court concluded that alternatives (suspended sentence, sequestration, fine) were inappropriate and that an immediate custodial sentence of 12 months, together with committal and warrant, was necessary to enforce the order and uphold the administration of justice; costs ordered on an indemnity basis with certificate for 3 counsel.

Court Disposition

Immediate custodial sentence of 12 months; Order for Committal granted; Warrant for Committal granted; costs to plaintiffs on an indemnity basis with certificate for 3 counsel.

Orders

  • Immediate custodial sentence of 12 months imposed on the defendant
  • Order for Committal granted in terms of the drafts submitted by the plaintiffs