3 Dec 2008
REM ASSETS LTD v. MIR INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- REM ASSETS LTD v. MIR INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA626/2008
The pre-judgment prohibition order became academic upon entry of interlocutory judgment and was discharged; section 21B(1) of the High Court Ordinance is not inconsistent with the Bills of Rights Ordinance; and there was probable cause to believe the 2nd defendant would leave Hong Kong if not prohibited given his lack of ties, delocalised residences and the interlocutory judgment with likely substantial damages, so the post-judgment prohibition order should be maintained.