Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Preservation order

Legal area

Court

18 May 2026

YVES CHARLES EDGAR BOUVIER v. PASCAL MARIE MICHAEL DE SARTHE AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2721
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1822/2025

Peretti was joined as a necessary party because his interest is directly related to the ownership dispute and joinder is necessary to avoid multiplicity and to determine ownership of the Subject Artworks; interpleader relief was inappropriate given defendants were not neutral and asserted ownership interests over some items; plaintiff demonstrated a serious issue to be tried as to ownership of Items 7 and 11 and disclosure was insufficient to enforce the preservation undertaking so further disclosure was ordered; delivery up to a reputable independent custodian and payment of proceeds into co…
2 Mar 2026

YVES CHARLES EDGAR BOUVIER v. PASCAL MARIE MICHAEL DE SARTHE AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1253
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1822/2025

The court refused to discharge or stay the Disclosure Undertaking because maintaining the Preservation Undertaking and enforcing it by disclosure was necessary in the absence of a demonstration that Plaintiff had no serious issue to be tried and no clear legal impediment to compliance; consequently disclosure was ordered by a fixed date, substantive issues were adjourned for a 3‑hour hearing, the SOC filing was extended on an unless basis and retrospective leave to file the late reply affirmation was granted with a timetable for responses.
13 May 2025

KAN SAU LAN, the Administratrix of the Estate of TSANG MA MING, deceased v. XU HONG

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1767
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1958/2021

The court granted the Plaintiff's application for specific discovery relating to the rental affairs of the Disputed Lands and ordered that net rental income from the Disputed Lands after 14 August 2017 be paid into an escrow account; because the Plaintiff was fully successful in the Discovery Application but only partially successful in the Preservation Order Application the court ordered two separate costs regimes: the Defendant must pay 85% of the costs of the Discovery Application forthwith (certificate for two counsel) and the costs of the Preservation Order Application are the Plaintiff'…
17 Mar 2025

KAN SAU LAN, the Administratrix of the Estate of TSANG MA MING, deceased v. XU HONG

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1161
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1958/2021

The court found there was a serious issue to be tried and a real risk that damages would be inadequate given the Defendant's undisclosed financial position; accordingly a preservation order/proprietary injunction was justified. The court limited retrospective accounting as oppressive and fixed the retrospective cut‑off at 14 August 2017 while preserving prospective rental income arising after 14 August 2024 pending trial.
5 Feb 2025

KING FIELD SHIPYARD LTD v. TAI PAK SEA-FOOD RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 560
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1494/2022

The court disallowed contested amendments seeking reinstatement to relicensable condition because they would impose obligations beyond the contract and, in respect of the Jumbo Kitchen Boat, would require effectively rebuilding an impossible restoration; the Expert Summons was dismissed because proposed expert issues were not properly pleaded, were fishing and not relevant/helpful; the Discovery Summons was dismissed because requested documents were not necessary for fair disposal of the cause; the Security Summons was allowed in part and the plaintiff was ordered to pay HK$7,000,000 into cou…
7 Nov 2024

安徽四建控股團有限公司(formerly known as 安徽新基建有限公司) v. 江蘇金昇實股份有限公司

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3657
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA160/2024

The court found that although the plaintiff established a good arguable case to enforce the Hefei judgment, the plaintiff failed to show a solid basis for concluding there was a real risk of unjustified dissipation of the defendant's assets; accordingly the Mareva injunction was not continued and the summons was dismissed.
23 Sept 2024

KING FIELD SHIPYARD LTD v. TAI PAK SEA-FOOD RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2320
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1494/2022

Retrospective leave granted for Leung 3rd and Wong 3rd but further new evidence (Wong 4th) disallowed; Preservation Order to maintain status quo: Tai Pak Kitchen Boat to remain in Zhongshan Shipyard with plaintiff bearing storage costs; Tai Pak Restaurant Boat to be dry-docked and stored on land at Jianglong Shipyard (Jianglong chosen over Xinhui because lower transport risk, D1 to bear cost difference); Fire Separation Barge to be stored on land in Hong Kong with Harbour Shipping; Remaining Hull Parts to be stored in Hong Kong as previously agreed; plaintiff ordered to provide fortification…
8 Apr 2024

KING FIELD SHIPYARD LTD v. TAI PAK SEA-FOOD RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 898
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1494/2022

The court held that the high threshold to strike out the claim (that it is impossible to succeed) is not met: there is a serious issue to be tried as to enforceability of the Agreement and entitlement to specific performance given the uniqueness of the boats and licences and the dispute as to which party prevented completion; on balance of convenience preservation orders should be granted in principle and the interim-interim order continued, subject to agreement on the form of preservation and any additional fortification within 21 days.
19 Dec 2023

CHIN CHOON ONN AND ANOTHER v. LAI SUM HUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 108
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1227/2022

The court ordered monthly disclosure of Wang Fat rental income (with specified wording changes) because monthly reporting is timely and matches rental payment cycles; the 1st defendant must disclose detailed particulars and supporting documents for the $600,000 cash withdrawal as set out in Exhibit LSH-7 because there is a prima facie case it was not in the ordinary course of business; release from the implied undertaking was granted save as to costs; and the plaintiffs' costs of the amended summons were summarily assessed at HKD 280,000 payable by the 1st defendant by 2 January 2024.
25 Sept 2023

G v. N

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2437
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT38/2021

The Court accepted that it had power under s86(4) to order security but exercised its discretion to refuse N's application for security for costs because the application was made late, would be disproportionate and prejudicial to G given the imminent substantive hearing; however the Court concluded fortification was necessary given the awards, the evidence of G's and KG's precarious finances and the risk to N, and ordered additional fortification of US$658,982.33 to be paid within 7 days.