Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Variation of mareva injunction

Legal area

Court

4 Jul 2018

XY, LLC v. JESSE ZHU (a.k.a JIA BEI ZHU and JESSE JIA BEI ZHU) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1485
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP869/2014

GNT failed to demonstrate by sufficient evidence that it could not obtain funds elsewhere to meet legal costs; the court was entitled to infer the source of prior funding was Jesse Zhu and therefore there were reasonable grounds to believe GNT could obtain funding other than the frozen HK account; permitting the variation would undermine enforcement of the plaintiff's foreign judgment; accordingly the summons to vary the Mareva injunction was dismissed and costs awarded to the plaintiff.
8 Sept 2009

SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. WONG KWONG YU AND OTHERS

Citation

SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. WONG KWONG YU AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1496/2009

The court refused the SFC's proposed variation because the mechanistic top-up/withdrawal regime would unduly fetter the court's discretion, be impracticable to police, and potentially oppressive (particularly paragraph 8); instead the ex parte order was continued as against the 1st and 2nd defendants while limited relief and directions were made as to the 3rd and 4th defendants, including retaining the deposited share certificates with the court until determination or trial.
17 Nov 1998

THE REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK v. CHEUNG TZE KEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

THE REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK v. CHEUNG TZE KEUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7228/1991

The court refused the broad variation because the defendants did not discharge the burden to show the solicitor‑held fund was the only or appropriate asset in light of credible material suggesting substantial undisclosed assets; nonetheless, in exceptional circumstances (defendant sentenced to death and immediate need to pursue an appeal) the court permitted a limited release of HK$250,000 for appeal and required accounting and supporting invoices; the garnishee order was varied to except that sum.
18 Jan 1996

MEI YU LAU v. SHIU KI LAU

Citation

MEI YU LAU v. SHIU KI LAU
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV216/1995

The Court held that variation of a Mareva injunction to release funds for legal costs is discretionary and requires a factual foundation; where the defendant has failed to disclose and is under suspicion of concealment or dissipation, the court may refuse further depletion of restrained assets until the defendant demonstrates no other available assets.

Hong Kong Case Law

XY, LLC v. JESSE ZHU (a.k.a JIA BEI ZHU and JESSE JIA BEI ZHU) AND ANOTHER

SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. WONG KWONG YU AND OTHERS

THE REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK v. CHEUNG TZE KEUNG AND OTHERS

MEI YU LAU v. SHIU KI LAU