Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Receiver appointment

Legal area

Court

4 Nov 2009

SABAH SHIPYARD SENDIRIAN BERHAD v. S.P.P\'NG & CO CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS AND ANOTHER

Citation

SABAH SHIPYARD SENDIRIAN BERHAD v. S.P.P\'NG & CO CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP415/2009

The court concluded that the plaintiff had satisfied the stringent requirements for Norwich Pharmacal relief: there was compelling evidence of fraud and a foreign judgment, the two defendants by virtue of their roles were likely to have relevant documents and information for tracing assets, the disclosure sought was not unduly wide, and the plaintiff offered indemnities; accordingly an order in terms of the Originating Summons (as amended) should be made with inclusion of an indemnity to the defendants and the plaintiff's solicitors directed to draw the order for approval.
14 May 2008

LAU KING TING KATIE v. CHENG MIU HAR STELLA AND OTHERS

Citation

LAU KING TING KATIE v. CHENG MIU HAR STELLA AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1049/2007

The court found there is a triable issue as to the execution of the disputed deed and admitted the deed into evidence on receipt of a solicitor’s undertaking to stamp it, but dismissed the plaintiff’s application for interlocutory injunctions because the plaintiff failed to provide adequate fortified cross-undertakings in damages and the balance of convenience did not support the injunctions; the receiver application was dismissed and the defendants’ application to vacate lis pendens was dismissed with costs orders nisi made.
17 Dec 2004

STEPHEN LIU YIU KEUNG v. OPEN SHARE INVESTMENTS LTD

Citation

STEPHEN LIU YIU KEUNG v. OPEN SHARE INVESTMENTS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA928/2004

Defendants failed to adduce evidence of the bank's prior written consent or of the alleged underlying debts and their fraud case lacked substance and particularity; consequently there were no triable issues and the court was entitled to enter final summary judgment for the plaintiff and order possession and ancillary relief.
8 Oct 2002

CHAN CHING KIT KATHERINE v. LAM SIK SHI AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHAN CHING KIT KATHERINE v. LAM SIK SHI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2239/2000

Because the 2nd defendant raised and fully argued the distinct issue of the exercise of the court's discretion and lost on every ground advanced, the court properly exercised its discretion to deprive him of part of his costs attributable to that issue (25%). The order nisi as to costs against both defendants is affirmed. Costs relating to the drafting and negotiation of the receiver's terms are part of the proceedings and the 2nd defendant is entitled to 75% of those costs to be taxed party and party. The 2nd defendant must pay the plaintiff's costs of the present applications.
23 Aug 1988

STEELTEX HONG KONG LTD v. STEELTEX SCAFFOLD SERVICES LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation

STEELTEX HONG KONG LTD v. STEELTEX SCAFFOLD SERVICES LTD. AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1215/1988

Because the defendants' application to discharge the Anton Piller order was aimed mainly at enforcing the cross-undertaking as to damages and lacked the necessary urgency, and because disputed factual issues (including ownership of scaffolding) are better resolved at trial, the application to discharge the Anton Piller order must be stood over until trial; additionally, interlocutory injunction terms that cannot be practically policed pending resolution of ownership (paragraphs 1(b)-(e) and 4) should be discharged while paragraph 1(a) remains in force until trial or further order.

Hong Kong Case Law

SABAH SHIPYARD SENDIRIAN BERHAD v. S.P.P\'NG & CO CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS AND ANOTHER

LAU KING TING KATIE v. CHENG MIU HAR STELLA AND OTHERS

STEPHEN LIU YIU KEUNG v. OPEN SHARE INVESTMENTS LTD

CHAN CHING KIT KATHERINE v. LAM SIK SHI AND ANOTHER

STEELTEX HONG KONG LTD v. STEELTEX SCAFFOLD SERVICES LTD. AND OTHERS