27 Oct 2017
章晶历 v. 吴联模
- Citation
- 章晶历 v. 吴联模
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCCT48/2017
The court refused the interim Mareva injunction because the applicant failed to produce 'solid evidence' of a real risk of dissipation: non-cooperation in enforcement proceedings, without more, does not establish the requisite risk; alleged share disposals were not shown to have been prompted by the enforcement order or to be for the purpose of defeating the claim; and the applicant failed to prove beneficial ownership of third‑party shares to justify Chabra relief.