Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fraudulent misappropriation

Legal area

Court

23 Feb 2023

TARGET INSURANCE CO LTD (MANAGERS APPOINTED UDNER SECTION 35(2)(b) OF THE INSURANCE ORDINANCE (CAP 41)) v. NG YU AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 565
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA305/2022

There is a reasonable and realistic prospect that the deputy judge erred in finding no good arguable case against the 1st defendant because the cumulative evidence, including that the recipient companies were owned or controlled by the 1st defendant, could support an inference of involvement and thus a real risk of dissipation; accordingly leave to appeal and a stay pending appeal were granted subject to expedition conditions.
5 Nov 2020

REMEDY ASIA LTD v. PATRICK TONG HING CHI AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2792
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA658/2011

Compound interest was refused because Remedy had not pleaded or proved entitlement with sufficient particularity and equitable compensation previously ordered addressed insolvency effects; simple pre‑judgment interest at HSBC prime +1% was awarded only from the date of the writ that launched the successful claim (16 April 2011) to judgment (16 April 2020) to reflect plaintiff delay before that date; post‑judgment interest to run at the statutory judgment rate; costs of the consolidated actions ordered at 75% in favour of the plaintiff with certificate for two counsel, taxed if not agreed; no…
22 May 2019

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (IN LIQUIDATION) v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1266
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1417/2013

The injunction was set aside because the plaintiffs lacked justification for proceeding ex parte (no demonstrated urgency or need for secrecy as defendants had long been on notice) and failed to establish a real risk of dissipation by cogent evidence; although a good arguable case on fraud existed, procedural impropriety and absence of solid evidence of dissipation required discharge of the Mareva order.
13 Feb 2012

WELL JOINT TRADING LTD v. CHIU CHUNG CHIU also known as CHIU CHUNG CHIU THOMAS AND OTHERS

Citation

WELL JOINT TRADING LTD v. CHIU CHUNG CHIU also known as CHIU CHUNG CHIU THOMAS AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1768/2011

The court held that the plaintiff demonstrated a good arguable case, there were assets within the jurisdiction subject to a real risk of dissipation, the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff, and there was no material non‑disclosure at the ex parte stage; accordingly the ex parte Mareva injunction was continued until trial or further order and the plaintiff's undertaking in damages did not require fortification.

Hong Kong Case Law

TARGET INSURANCE CO LTD (MANAGERS APPOINTED UDNER SECTION 35(2)(b) OF THE INSURANCE ORDINANCE (CAP 41)) v. NG YU AND OTHERS

REMEDY ASIA LTD v. PATRICK TONG HING CHI AND OTHERS

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (IN LIQUIDATION) v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS

WELL JOINT TRADING LTD v. CHIU CHUNG CHIU also known as CHIU CHUNG CHIU THOMAS AND OTHERS