Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Tracing and proprietary claims

Legal area

Court

22 Apr 2022

JIN JIANG INVESTMENT LTD v. 深圳市威廉金融控股有限公司 AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1068
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA196/2021

Plaintiffs have not but may possibly have a proprietary claim; however they have failed to particularise, provide evidence or seek discovery in time and have caused delay; accordingly the court exercised discretion to give a final conditional opportunity (an unless order) to seek discovery by a fixed deadline failing which the charging orders nisi and garnishee orders nisi will be made absolute and the variation summons granted, with an adjournment to mention only if the plaintiffs comply by the deadline.
18 Sept 2019

NG CHUNG KWONG AND ANOTHER v. KIM SUNGHUN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2406
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA86/2019

On the pleaded facts the plaintiffs established a good arguable case under the Chabra jurisdiction that funds in IDSF's HSBC bank account were assets belonging to or under the control/access of Kim such that an injunction should issue to prevent dissipation below HK$13,500,000; however the unpleaded declaratory relief that the entire HK$165,000,000 belonged to Kim was refused because it was not prayed for in the pleading and was unnecessary for the injunctive relief granted.
19 Sept 2018

BANCO DE CHILE v. BORUIDA TRADING CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2294
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1621/2018

The application for disclosure was granted because the plaintiff's abandonment of proprietary remedies against Tech Giant did not preclude ordering SCB to disclose account records necessary to trace the misappropriated DB funds and pursue recovery against third parties; the disclosure is relevant and properly ancillary to the Mareva injunction and to enforcement of the default judgment, and a limited release from the implied undertaking was justified while preserving the bank's privilege against self-incrimination.
8 Sept 2017

ZHEJIANG PROVINCIAL RAILWAY INVESTMENT INTERNATIONAL TRADE CO., LTD v. HK ZEXIN RESOURCES CO., LTD

Citation

ZHEJIANG PROVINCIAL RAILWAY INVESTMENT INTERNATIONAL TRADE CO., LTD v. HK ZEXIN RESOURCES CO., LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3243/2016

The Bankers Book order was limited to commence from 9 December 2016 rather than 28 September 2016 because the Mareva injunction has no retrospective effect and the plaintiff had no proprietary claim; ordering disclosure for the period before the injunction in a non‑proprietary claim would be an impermissible fishing exercise and would not be necessary to give effect to the Mareva injunction. Accordingly the draft order was made subject to specified amendments and costs were awarded nisi in favour of the defendant.

Hong Kong Case Law

JIN JIANG INVESTMENT LTD v. 深圳市威廉金融控股有限公司 AND OTHERS

NG CHUNG KWONG AND ANOTHER v. KIM SUNGHUN AND ANOTHER

BANCO DE CHILE v. BORUIDA TRADING CO LTD AND OTHERS

ZHEJIANG PROVINCIAL RAILWAY INVESTMENT INTERNATIONAL TRADE CO., LTD v. HK ZEXIN RESOURCES CO., LTD