13 Mar 2017
The court applied the duty of full and frank disclosure and the principles of relevance and necessity to compel the husband to answer and produce specified documents and limited disclosures to defined time periods where appropriate, while refusing questions lacking a factual basis; discovery was partially granted with specific limits and timelines and costs awarded in part to the wife.
29 Jun 2006
The interlocutory injunction was dismissed because the plaintiff's unexplained four‑year delay defeated any claim of likely irreparable harm and there was no evidence of a real risk of dissipation or insufficiency of defendant's Hong Kong assets; conversely, security for costs was ordered because the plaintiff is a foreign company, there were no factors justifying refusal, and it is just to protect the defendant from cross‑border enforcement difficulty; proceedings were stayed pending payment of HK$190,000 security and dismissal was ordered if security not given.