Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Leave to serve out of jurisdiction

  • 5 Sept 2025

    HAITONG INTERNATIONAL PRODUCTS & SOLUTIONS LTD v. WANG YAFENG

    Citation
    [2025] HKCA 821
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV415/2024

    The dismissal of the Beijing court's jurisdictional challenge was not a material omission for purposes of the plaintiff's continuing duty of disclosure because non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses in the parties' agreement meant the defendant bore a heavy burden to show strong or powerful reasons to displace Hong Kong jurisdiction; the mainland proceedings had not progressed to a stage that materially affected the dispute at the time of the default judgment application, therefore the First Summons grounds failed and the appeal was dismissed.

    • Forum non conveniens
    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Default judgment
    • Material non-disclosure
    • Non-exclusive jurisdiction clause
    • Continuing duty of disclosure

  • 24 Jun 2021

    ERNEST CHONG KIAN v. CHONG YIN SING AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    [2021] HKCFI 1831
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA15070/1998

    The court determined that the substantive issue whether a notice to act in person containing a foreign address is acceptable must be determined at a substantive hearing; in the interim the court set directions for submissions and hearing, expressed a preliminary view that a Hong Kong address is required from a litigant who submits to Hong Kong jurisdiction, and refused the ad hoc adjournment request.

    • Notice to act in person
    • Foreign address for service
    • Unless order
    • Adjournment
    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Taxation of costs

  • 15 Oct 2018

    AMADEAUS INVESTMENT LTD v. DR LIN KAO KUN

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 2343
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2379/2015

    Master K. Lo found that the plaintiff demonstrated good reason for extension based on credible evidence of failed attempts to serve the defendant at the Shanghai address and investigative results indicating the defendant could not be located there; clause 9.2 was not a contractual method of service for originating process and thus did not render service unnecessary; balancing the factors at the discretionary stage (category 2 case, personal service effected within one month of expiry, first extension application, prejudice to plaintiff if refused) justified upholding the ex parte extension an…

    • Extension of writ
    • Service out of jurisdiction
    • Contractual service clause
    • Good reason for extension
    • Material non-disclosure
    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction

  • 29 Jul 2016

    NEWOCEAN PETROLEUM CO LTD v. O.W. BUNKER CHINA LTD (in liquidation) AND OTHERS

    Citation
    NEWOCEAN PETROLEUM CO LTD v. O.W. BUNKER CHINA LTD (in liquidation) AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA384/2015

    The court refused to vary the costs order nisi and confirmed that each party should bear its own costs because the plaintiff materially shifted its case from the contractual limb to the conversion limb after the Master, the claims were not purely alternative, and on a full consideration of the circumstances the exercise of discretion did not justify awarding costs to the plaintiff; ancillary allegations (misrepresentation, sanctioned offer) did not alter the exercise of discretion and either were not properly before the court or did not provide protection to the defendants.

    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Costs order nisi
    • Conversion v contract
    • Material non-disclosure
    • Sanctioned offer

  • 15 Mar 2012

    EFFISCIENT LTD v. EDWARD EUGENE LEHMAN

    Citation
    EFFISCIENT LTD v. EDWARD EUGENE LEHMAN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP2524/2011

    The judge held that the court could extend time under Order 52 Rule 3(2) for issuing an originating summons served in accordance with the rules, there was no basis for requiring a fresh application for leave in the circumstances, the respondent's allegations of deliberate impropriety were unfounded and misleading, and accordingly the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the applicant (HK$45,000).

    • Extension of time
    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Renewal of lapsed leave
    • Leave to appeal
    • Directions and case management

  • 14 Mar 2011

    TAN KAH ENG v. TAN ENG KHIAM

    Citation
    TAN KAH ENG v. TAN ENG KHIAM
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA9640/1999

    Judge re-granted leave to issue and serve a concurrent writ out of the jurisdiction and extended the expired writ because the fresh Singapore annulment restored retrospective capacity, proper service was originally effected pursuant to court leave (later set aside), the court was satisfied there was good cause/good reason to renew the writ and re-grant leave, and on balance of prejudice it was just to allow renewal and re-granting despite deliberate non-disclosure which remains matter for Singapore authorities.

    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Annulment of bankruptcy and retrospective capacity
    • Material non-disclosure
    • Renewal/extension of writ
    • Forum non conveniens
    • Validation of service

  • 18 Feb 2011

    HUNTLEY INTERNATIONAL LTD v. ASAP LTD IMPORT-EXPORT S.P.A

    Citation
    HUNTLEY INTERNATIONAL LTD v. ASAP LTD IMPORT-EXPORT S.P.A
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA157/2009

    The plaintiff failed to establish a good arguable case that the 2002 distribution agreement was governed by Hong Kong law; consequently the claim does not fall within Order 11, rule 1(1)(d)(iii) and the Master’s leave for service out of jurisdiction was set aside.

    • Service out of jurisdiction
    • Forum conveniens
    • Choice of law
    • Lis alibi pendens
    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction

  • 14 Nov 2007

    PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE CO LTD v. HARMUTTY LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE CO LTD v. HARMUTTY LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV371/2006

    Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused because each ground lacked sufficient merit: (1) established authority and precedent do not support extending Mareva/Anton Piller re‑grant principles to re‑grant of leave to serve out; (2) the plaintiff's undertaking not to pursue parallel Taiwan proceedings while Hong Kong proceedings continue is an effective protection and not objectionable in principle; (3) the Court of First Instance properly exercised its forum conveniens discretion and there was no basis for interference; (4) the pleadings disclose a serious issue to be tried agai…

    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Re-grant of relief after discharge for material non-disclosure
    • Undertaking not to pursue parallel foreign proceedings
    • Forum conveniens discretion
    • Validity and recognition of foreign service (order 11 r.5(2))

  • 14 Sept 2006

    HONG JING CO LTD v. ZHUHAI KWOK YUEN CO LTD

    Citation
    HONG JING CO LTD v. ZHUHAI KWOK YUEN CO LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA156/2006

    The court dismissed the application to re-open because the undisclosed signed undertaking related only to an arguable defence and did not render the plaintiff's case groundless; therefore the omission was not material to the question of whether leave to serve out of the jurisdiction should be granted and the original grant of leave and exercise of discretion in favour of Hong Jing were properly made; consequently the reopening application failed and the restrained sum must be paid into court pending final disposition.

    • Reopening orders
    • Material non-disclosure
    • Forum conveniens
    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Full and frank disclosure
    • Payment into court

  • 22 Dec 2005

    LI TIN SANG ADAM v. POON BUN CHAK AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LI TIN SANG ADAM v. POON BUN CHAK AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCW1196/2004

    Although the 5th respondent would have succeeded in setting aside service had no leave been obtained, the petitioner had obtained ex parte leave to serve out of the jurisdiction and service upon the 5th respondent’s registered agent in the BVI was proved; considering the interests of justice and absence of significant prejudice, the court permitted the late affidavit, held service valid, dismissed the 5th respondent’s application and made a limited costs order nisi (costs to the 5th respondent up to the date of the master’s ex parte leave; thereafter no order).

    • Service of process
    • Jurisdiction
    • Winding-up of unregistered companies
    • Ex parte relief
    • Leave to serve out of jurisdiction
    • Costs