Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Ex parte proceedings

Legal area

Court

8 Apr 2019

劉歡AND OTHERS v. WONG CHUN KWONG

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 907
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1812/2018

The court held there was no basis to adjourn the hearing due to internal disputes between the plaintiffs and their legal representatives and proceeded with the scheduled hearing; given the evidence of control and risk of dissipation, and the significant impact of a Mareva injunction, it was expedient to grant/maintain the asset‑freezing injunction while protecting the respondent from undue prejudice.
11 Jan 2017

LIU YUN HOP AND LIU KWAN KIT SUING AS LIU SUI HING TSO v. LIU TSIK HING

Citation

LIU YUN HOP AND LIU KWAN KIT SUING AS LIU SUI HING TSO v. LIU TSIK HING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1479/2016

The ex parte summons was dismissed: the court declined to make a declaration of death or presumed death and declined to make a representation order under Order 15 r6A because (a) it was not appropriate to grant the declaratory relief in the ex parte context and declarations are statements of legal right not mere factual findings, and (b) the applicant failed to show the representation order was necessary or that all reasonable steps had been taken to trace beneficiaries, so the court would not exercise its discretion to appoint a representative.
18 Sept 2014

RE LEUNG KIT HING, DORIS

Citation

RE LEUNG KIT HING, DORIS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV67/2013

An applicant without beneficial interest who brings a delayed, ex parte application to revoke a grant must have the grantees joined and properly served; absent clear evidence justifying a closed hearing, the appeal cannot proceed ex parte and will be stayed or dismissed unless the applicant effects joinder and service within specified time limits.
13 May 2014

RE CHUNG KAI YIN

Citation

RE CHUNG KAI YIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP751/2014

The court was satisfied there was no one to be served or to represent the relevant estates, the property was not included in the earlier grant of probate, and therefore it was appropriate under the court's powers (s.45 Trustees Ordinance) to order the property to vest in the applicant absolutely, subject to the condition that the applicant file an affirmation exhibiting the grant of probate in respect of his father's estate.
23 Nov 2011

RE TOYOTA TSUSHO CORPORATION

Citation

RE TOYOTA TSUSHO CORPORATION
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2072/2011

Because the Merger Agreement transferred Kasho's assets to the Applicant and no invalidation action was filed within the six-month period under Japanese law, the court held that section 45(b)(iii) authorized an ex-parte vesting order to vest Kasho's half share in the Applicant.
19 Jul 2010

SLWE AND OTHERS v. CTT AND ANOTHER

Citation

SLWE AND OTHERS v. CTT AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1237/2010

Section 8 does not place the High Court in the position of an appellate court to set aside a Family Court guardianship order obtained through an allegedly irregular ex parte application; the correct remedy is to apply to the Family Court to set aside the 17 December 2009 order for material irregularity. Given respondents' undertaking to consent to setting aside and return the matter to the Family Court, the High Court will not make substantive orders on the originating summons but will determine costs for the High Court hearing.
10 May 2010

LAU CHI WAN AND ANOTHER v. SHING KAI KWAN

Citation

LAU CHI WAN AND ANOTHER v. SHING KAI KWAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP601/2010

Where reasonable searches demonstrate that the mortgagee and successors cannot be located, the District Court has jurisdiction under s.37 DCO to hear an application under s.12A CPO; the court may order payment into court of an amount it considers adequate (here HK$1,308) and, upon payment, declare the mortgage discharged and make no order as to costs.
1 Apr 2008

FU KIN CHOW AND OTHERS v. IP KAT FAN

Citation

FU KIN CHOW AND OTHERS v. IP KAT FAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP1314/2007

Given extensive but unsuccessful searches for the mortgagee, the subsisting 1936 mortgage and the relatively small, justifiable redemption sum calculated by accepted prior methods, the court exercised its discretion under s12A to grant leave to pay HK$4,600 into court to redeem the mortgage and to declare that upon such payment the lot will be freed and discharged from the mortgage; the District Court had jurisdiction and a single‑hearing approach was appropriate under the facts.
22 Feb 2007

CHIU PO LING, a minor suing by his mother and next friend, SHEK KAM KIU v. WONG YUET

Citation

CHIU PO LING, a minor suing by his mother and next friend, SHEK KAM KIU v. WONG YUET
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI115/2006

The court accepted the plaintiffs medical evidence and documentary proof of the defendants former address, inferred the defendant defaulted and likely avoided service, permitted an ex parte assessment under Order 65 r9 as not unjust, and awarded the claimed sums for general damages, future medical expenses and special damages with specified rates of pre-judgment and judgment interest and costs to the plaintiff.
20 Feb 2004

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. OFFICIAL SOLICITOR

Citation

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE v. OFFICIAL SOLICITOR
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP44/2004

The court must observe the two-stage statutory scheme in Part II: give directions under Section 7 (which may be dealt with ex parte on papers), require notice under Section 8 and then hold the inquiry under Section 10; therefore the first call-over cannot be treated as the inquiry, the alleged incapacitated person and the intended committee/Official Solicitor need not be joined as parties, Order 80 guardian ad litem process is inapt, service cannot be dispensed with though substituted service may be ordered when personal service is ineffectual, and the court may dispense with doctors' attenda…