Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Order 49b rhc

  • 27 Oct 2021

    V CAPITAL LTD v. MARGARET CHIU

    Citation
    [2021] HKCFI 3133
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1431/2017

    The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the judgment debtor wilfully failed to make full disclosure required by the Disclosure Order and Compliance Order (including affirming compliance falsely), rejected explanations of secretary illness, solicitor advice and depression as excuses, and in the exercise of its discretion committed the debtor to one month imprisonment, fixed maintenance at $725/day, and ordered costs on indemnity basis.

  • 19 Feb 2009

    POON TING CHAU v. WONG KWOK CHI AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    POON TING CHAU v. WONG KWOK CHI AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV65/2007

    The Court dismissed the appeal because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate any substantive error: Order 49B and the examination regime are constitutional and appropriately invoked; the Master acted within discretion; clerical errors in the Examination Orders were amendable under Order 20 r11 or inherent jurisdiction; lack of personal service did not render amended orders void; substituted service and ex parte amendments were properly handled, therefore the Examination Orders and Substituted Service Orders stand.

  • 10 Dec 2008

    IP SUK CHING v. LUK KAM HEUNG

    Citation
    IP SUK CHING v. LUK KAM HEUNG
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1215/2006

    The court found the judgment debtor willfully failed to disclose requested documents and particulars (including liabilities secured on the Shatin property and particulars of transactions over HK$20,000) despite a year and a consent order; there was insufficient evidence to prove dispositions were made with the sole purpose of avoiding the judgment; the debtor was able to satisfy the judgment; consequently committal was appropriate for willful non‑disclosure and, concurrently, an instalment order was justified; imprisonment and instalment orders are not mutually exclusive.

  • 20 Oct 2006

    POON TING CHAU v. WONG KWOK CHI AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    POON TING CHAU v. WONG KWOK CHI AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2903/2004

    The ex parte Examination Orders and Substituted Service Orders were lawfully made under the Rules of the High Court; omissions relied on by the plaintiff were not material to the exercise of discretion, substituted service was justified on affidavit evidence of evasion/unavailability, the errors were clerical and amendable, failure to personally serve amended orders did not render them void, and therefore the plaintiff's applications to set aside the orders lacked merit; appeals dismissed and costs awarded.