Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Ex parte disclosure obligations

Legal area

Court

23 Mar 2020

WELL THRIVE LTD v. HIGH WEST CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 500
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1946/2019

The court found there was a serious issue to be tried on the competing constructions of the Contracts (security interest versus outright transfer), no material non-disclosure on fact or law in the ex parte application given the urgency and the matters disclosed, and that damages would not be an adequate remedy to the plaintiff in the circumstances (thin trading and concentrated shareholding). Accordingly the interlocutory injunction was continued pending disposal of the related arbitration.
20 Dec 2017

NEWOCEAN PETROLEUM CO LTD v. RIO TINTO SHIPPING (ASIA) PTE. LTD

Citation

NEWOCEAN PETROLEUM CO LTD v. RIO TINTO SHIPPING (ASIA) PTE. LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2265/2016

Although the plaintiff had a good arguable conversion claim based on mixing and there was arguable jurisdiction under Order 11 r1(1)(f), the Leave Order was set aside and not re-granted because the plaintiff made material non-disclosure in its ex parte application (failing to draw the Master's attention to an arguable contractual declaration claim), and material non-disclosure precluded re-granting leave forthwith.
3 Dec 2004

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHOY BING WING

Citation

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHOY BING WING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV11/2004

The Chief Judge correctly dismissed the respondent's application to strike out the Contempt Notice of Motion because the applicant's supporting statement and verifying affirmation met the requirements of Order 52, there was no material non-disclosure in the ex parte application, evidential admissibility and defences are matters for the substantive committal hearing, and a strike-out could not be granted absent a plain and obvious failure of the applicant's case.
9 Nov 1988

THE OWNERS OF CARGO LATELY LADEN ON BOARD THE VESSEL "K.H.ENTREPRISE" v. THE OWNES OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "PIONEER CONTAINER"

Citation

THE OWNERS OF CARGO LATELY LADEN ON BOARD THE VESSEL "K.H.ENTREPRISE" v. THE OWNES OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "PIONEER CONTAINER"
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAJ36/1988

Section 21(8) did not deprive the court of jurisdiction because the prior proceedings were against a different ship/owner and s.21(8) must be read with s.21(4); the earlier arrest did not constitute a bar to the present action. The conduct did not amount to vexatious litigation and the nondisclosure on the ex parte application, though insufficiently detailed, did not justify setting aside the arrest given the plaintiffs' good faith.
25 Jan 1985

PIONEER INTERNATION BUYING AGENCIES (HK) LTD AND ANOTHER v. TUNG CHIEN KWOK AND OTHES

Citation

PIONEER INTERNATION BUYING AGENCIES (HK) LTD AND ANOTHER v. TUNG CHIEN KWOK AND OTHES
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA346/1985

Material non-disclosure occurred in the plaintiffs' ex parte application—specifically the omission of cheque stubs and accounting indications that substantial payments had been made by the 4th defendant to the plaintiffs and misstatements about invoicing practice—which were facts that might have influenced the judge; therefore the Anton Piller and related injunctions granted ex parte were discharged and costs awarded to the defendants.
10 Jan 1983

DIGNITY CARRIERS INC. v. JOHN A. KISTVAD

Citation

DIGNITY CARRIERS INC. v. JOHN A. KISTVAD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA11466/1982

Warrant was discharged because on the evidence the defendant had no assets in Hong Kong and had made full disclosure of his means; the plaintiff had failed to disclose material facts in its ex parte application and the court must, consistent with Order 44A and Kirpalani, exercise discretion to avoid indefinite imprisonment and abuse, taking into account the debtor's means and the limits imposed by foreign law on enforcement of foreign assets.

Hong Kong Case Law

WELL THRIVE LTD v. HIGH WEST CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC

NEWOCEAN PETROLEUM CO LTD v. RIO TINTO SHIPPING (ASIA) PTE. LTD

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHOY BING WING

THE OWNERS OF CARGO LATELY LADEN ON BOARD THE VESSEL "K.H.ENTREPRISE" v. THE OWNES OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "PIONEER CONTAINER"

PIONEER INTERNATION BUYING AGENCIES (HK) LTD AND ANOTHER v. TUNG CHIEN KWOK AND OTHES

DIGNITY CARRIERS INC. v. JOHN A. KISTVAD