30 Jan 2024
D3's Summons was dismissed because the supplemental statement (Chen 2) is a late, unexplained attempt to introduce expert opinion disguised as factual evidence; the applicant failed to justify the delay or seek expert directions earlier and admission would undermine case management and prejudice other parties.
21 Dec 2023
Plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof on all substantive allegations because key evidential foundations were unreliable or unproven: the Fantasy System and Daily Sales Reports were not shown to be accurate or tamper-proof, the alleged forged Maysun invoices were not proven to be false, electronic evidence (MSN chats, Excel files) lacked provenance and completeness, expert valuations were deficient, and payments under the running account were reconciled; accordingly there was no sufficient proof of breach of fiduciary duty, dishonest assistance, knowing receipt or unlawful means co…
21 Apr 2023
Applying the Compensation Approach endorsed in Good Faith, the Tribunal found R4's revitalization case and last-minute valuation revisions were unreasonable and had no realistic prospect, caused unnecessary costs and trial delay; accordingly the costs order nisi was varied so the applicants pay 30% of R4's costs (including reserved costs) with certificate for two counsel to be taxed on High Court scale and R4 must pay the applicants' costs of the variation application with certificate for one counsel to be taxed on High Court scale.
10 Mar 2023
The Bankrupt succeeded in establishing a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds as to the debt because there were arguable, expert‑supported challenges to the valuation and appropriation of the FLL shares and the NAL loan under the relevant pledge terms and Luxembourg law; however, the court exercised its discretion to refuse annulment because the Bankrupt failed to provide a credible explanation for her absence at the hearing, failed to comply with statutory duties under s18 BO (no Hong Kong statement of affairs), engaged in evasive conduct, made selective disclosure, and there was a real…
30 Sept 2022
No duty of care was owed by the 2nd defendant to the individual shareholder because there was no identifiable transaction in contemplation when the auditor was engaged (the buyout petition was stayed and dormant), the pleaded facts did not show the auditors knew the plaintiff would rely on the accounts for a specific buyout, and the ASoC failed adequately to plead loss and causation; accordingly the claim against the 2nd defendant was unsustainable and the appeal was dismissed.
19 Apr 2017
The judge refused both leave applications because neither party demonstrated a reasonable prospect of success on appeal nor any other cogent reason favouring an appeal in the interests of justice under s63A. The trial judge's factual findings on asset values, inclusion of properties, parties' needs and contributions were detailed, rational and not shown to be plainly wrong; therefore leave to appeal was denied and the ancillary relief orders stand.
31 Oct 2016
The tribunal applied the compensation approach from Good Faith but retained a broad discretionary assessment of costs rather than an automatic shift based solely on the fact that an offer exceeded the tribunal assessment. On the facts the five respondents deliberately embraced an exaggerated EUV (principally via Mr Siu) and pursued an unsupportable 'hope value' (via Ms Sat), causing wasted time and expense. The appropriate cut-off for costs entitlement was fixed as the day before trial (1 March 2015); consequently the five respondents are disallowed certain expert and related legal costs and…
10 Jul 2015
The petition did not adequately plead particular facts justifying a winding-up order as an alternative to a buyout; the re-amendments were insufficiently specific (notably the unsupported loss of substratum allegation) and therefore the winding-up prayer had no realistic prospect of success; accordingly the court struck out the winding-up relief and permitted limited re-amendment excluding the unsupported loss of substratum allegation.
13 Apr 2015
D3's application to set aside the regular default judgment was dismissed because he failed to demonstrate a meritorious defence with a real prospect of success: his evidence contained material commercial implausibilities and inconsistencies (timing and matching of payments, acceptance without pursuing outstanding balance, lack of credible explanation of business arrangements and valuations), he delayed about six months without satisfactory explanation, and setting aside would prejudice the plaintiff which had already altered its position; accordingly the court refused to set aside the judgmen…
23 Mar 2015
The court struck out the petitions against CY Macao and CY Mauritius for failure to plead and prove the requisite substantial connection with Hong Kong under s327 and held there was no realistic prospect the petitioners could establish jurisdiction; the court struck out the winding-up prayers in the five Hong Kong company petitions because, on the evidence, there was no realistic prospect of a winding-up order given the viable buy-out alternative and the respondents' apparent ability and incentive to fund a buy-out; the court allowed the amendment summons substituting buy-out relief for reins…