Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Attribution of knowledge

Legal area

Court

30 Sept 2021

CHINA METAL RECYCLING (HOLDINGS) LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ANOTHER v. UBS AG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1450
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP223/2021

Leave to appeal was refused. The Court held the correct threshold under Order 11 r1(1)(c) is whether there is a serious issue to be tried as to whether the out-of-jurisdiction defendant is a necessary or proper party, not a requirement to demonstrate a good arguable case on the merits; the Criterion principle did not plainly preclude the plaintiffs' knowing receipt claim on these facts such that service out should be set aside; attribution of UBS AG's knowledge to UBS Ltd raised triable issues and could not be resolved interlocutorily; whether the Limitation Ordinance s26 applies to the claim…
8 Apr 2021

CHINA METAL RECYCLING (HOLDINGS) LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ANOTHER v. UBS AG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 918
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1348/2019

The court held the plaintiffs had shown a good arguable case that UBS Europe SE was a necessary or proper party under O.11 r.1(1)(c), that there are serious issues to be tried on attribution of AG's knowledge to Limited and on the limitation question, and that renewal of the writ was justified; accordingly the 2nd defendant's summons to set aside service out and to discharge the extension was dismissed.
28 Aug 2020

GREAT STRATEGY PROPERTIES LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG WEI GEORGE AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCA 730
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP57/2020

The Court held the judge did not err in refusing a preliminary trial because resolving whether the Former Liquidators had the requisite knowledge and whether that knowledge is attributable to the plaintiffs necessarily requires resolution of factual disputes about the acts and omissions alleged to constitute negligence; a preliminary trial would not save time or costs and the judge's case‑management decision was not plainly wrong.
4 Jun 2020

GREAT STRATEGY PROPERTIES LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG WEI GEORGE AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1060
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA962/2015

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the judge did not err in principle or in the exercise of discretion under O33 rr3 and 4(2); Kensland Realty’s remark that s31 issues can be tried as preliminary issues is contextual and does not mandate a preliminary trial in every case; here factual disputes about the former liquidators’ acts and causation must be resolved and a preliminary trial would not necessarily save time or costs, so the refusal of a preliminary trial was a proper case management decision and the proposed appeal lacks reasonable prospects of success.
13 Mar 2014

MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE TRADING LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) (formerly known as MOULIN OPTICAL MANUFACTORY LTD) v. THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Citation

MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE TRADING LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) (formerly known as MOULIN OPTICAL MANUFACTORY LTD) v. THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV5/2013

Majority held appeal dismissed: primary attribution applies to attribute the guilty knowledge of the active fraudulent directors to MGET for the purposes of the IRO; s64(1)(a) requires an external/physical impediment and was not satisfied by undiscovered internal fraud; deliberate fraudulent misstatements are not 'errors' under s70A; the fraud exception is confined to 'redress' cases (company suing wrongdoer) and does not operate to bar attribution against a third-party statutory claimant (the Commissioner) in this context.
26 Jan 2004

GREAT HONOUR INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER v. KO YIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

GREAT HONOUR INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER v. KO YIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA298/2002

Joinder of the solicitors was refused and the Master's order allowing joinder was reversed because the proposed joinder would cause undue delay and expand the ambit of proceedings materially given the stage reached; the appropriate course is for the plaintiffs seeking contribution from the solicitors to pursue separate actions promptly with liberty to apply later for consolidation if they catch up with the main proceedings.
26 Jan 2004

FORTIS BANK ASIA HK v. SINO GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

FORTIS BANK ASIA HK v. SINO GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP4950/2001

The Master\'s order permitting joinder of the solicitors is reversed because the proposed joinder would likely cause substantial delay and broaden the factual inquiry beyond the legal question of attribution of knowledge to the bank; the appropriate course is for Great Honour and Wall to pursue separate proceedings against the solicitors and, if those proceedings progress sufficiently, to apply later for consolidation.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHINA METAL RECYCLING (HOLDINGS) LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ANOTHER v. UBS AG AND ANOTHER

CHINA METAL RECYCLING (HOLDINGS) LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ANOTHER v. UBS AG AND ANOTHER

GREAT STRATEGY PROPERTIES LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG WEI GEORGE AND OTHERS

GREAT STRATEGY PROPERTIES LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG WEI GEORGE AND OTHERS

MOULIN GLOBAL EYECARE TRADING LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) (formerly known as MOULIN OPTICAL MANUFACTORY LTD) v. THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

GREAT HONOUR INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER v. KO YIN AND ANOTHER

FORTIS BANK ASIA HK v. SINO GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS