Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Tracing and constructive trust

Legal area

Court

30 Sept 2025

LI YIDONG AND ANOTHER v. CHEN PING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5963
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2495/2024

Intervener's joinder dismissed because, although it has an interest connected to the subject matter, joinder is not necessary, just or convenient: joinder would add cost, delay and multiplicity, produce no prejudice to the Intervener if not joined (claims between P1 and Intervener could proceed by arbitration), and the application was delayed. The related stay to arbitration is unnecessary given dismissal of joinder. Letters of request were refused in the exercise of discretion because the documents were not necessary in the interests of justice given the existing one‑off s.21 disclosure orde…
28 Aug 2006

PBM (HONG KONG) LTD v. TANG KAM LUN, ALLAN AND OTHERS

Citation

PBM (HONG KONG) LTD v. TANG KAM LUN, ALLAN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA13316/1997

The Master held that the 27 September 2002 costs order, as explained by the trial judge, was intended to include interlocutory and reserved costs and therefore the Taxing Master had jurisdiction; the investigatory and tracing disbursements were necessary and proper to prove the fraudulent scheme and links between defendants and so were allowable and not excessive; apportionment was refused because the taxed bill contained no items wholly extraneous to the applicants and the investigatory work was integral to prosecuting the claims; and a 15% global reduction of the taxed amount for inordinate…
7 Dec 2001

CTO (H.K.) LTD. v. LI MAN CHIU AND OTHERS

Citation

CTO (H.K.) LTD. v. LI MAN CHIU AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5165/2001

The ex parte Mareva injunction was discharged because the plaintiff made material but not culpable insufficient disclosure regarding its financial position to the ex parte judge; nonetheless, on the merits there was a good arguable case against the 2nd defendant and a real risk of dissipation, and therefore a fresh Mareva injunction was properly re-granted in the exercise of discretion provided the plaintiff fortifies its undertaking by providing a HK$1,000,000 bank guarantee within seven days; the prohibitory restraint against the 1st defendant was reasonable and retained; specific exception…

Hong Kong Case Law

LI YIDONG AND ANOTHER v. CHEN PING AND OTHERS

PBM (HONG KONG) LTD v. TANG KAM LUN, ALLAN AND OTHERS

CTO (H.K.) LTD. v. LI MAN CHIU AND OTHERS