Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interim relief pending appeal

Legal area

Court

23 Jun 2021

CHEN HONGQING v. The persons whose names are set out in the second column of the Schedule to the Re amended Writ of Summons filed on 26 March 2018 AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1803
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2648/2017

The court refused leave to appeal because the proposed grounds were not reasonably arguable: the submission‑to‑jurisdiction ground failed (no clear submission by Jinan Group and SHDs' purpose was preservation of status quo), the Ruzhou‑judgments ground was inconsistent with Chen HQ's prior stance and barred, fresh evidence was inadmissible, and the receivership grounds lacked necessity. Accordingly interim relief pending appeal was refused. The court allowed parts of the SHDs Directions Summons (discharging undertakings and injunctions as appropriate) subject to the separate CHQ Injunction de…
18 Nov 2011

SUPER MASTER INVESTMENTS LTD v. POWER APEX LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

SUPER MASTER INVESTMENTS LTD v. POWER APEX LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2496/2011

The Vice‑President held there was insufficient evidence of a real risk of dissipation to justify continuation of the Mareva injunction against the defendants and declined to continue that relief; however, on the arguable prospect of a quistclose trust and on the plaintiff's undertaking (not to dispose of an additional block of shares), the court exercised its discretion to grant an interim order restraining disposal of the remainder of 360,000,000 shares in terms of para.3(a) of the ex parte order of 10 October 2011; costs concerning leave to appeal were left to the court hearing the leave ap…
11 Nov 1987

MANDARIN RESOURCES CORPORATION LTD v. DAVID CHENG HENG SOON AND OTHERS

Citation

MANDARIN RESOURCES CORPORATION LTD v. DAVID CHENG HENG SOON AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV146/1987

The Court held that an interim receiver should be appointed pending the appeal because there were strong, unrefuted allegations of fraud and a real risk of dissipation of assets which would render a successful judgment valueless; a contention that jurisdiction was disputed did not preclude the grant of interim relief; the balance of convenience favored appointment with appropriate terms as to security.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHEN HONGQING v. The persons whose names are set out in the second column of the Schedule to the Re amended Writ of Summons filed on 26 March 2018 AND OTHERS

SUPER MASTER INVESTMENTS LTD v. POWER APEX LTD AND ANOTHER

MANDARIN RESOURCES CORPORATION LTD v. DAVID CHENG HENG SOON AND OTHERS