Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fraud and conspiracy allegations

Legal area

Court

21 Dec 2017

AESO HOLDING LTD AND ANOTHER v. DRAGON SUCCESS ENTERPRISE LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

AESO HOLDING LTD AND ANOTHER v. DRAGON SUCCESS ENTERPRISE LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1737/2017

The court continued the Mareva injunction (paragraphs 2(1),(2),(4),(5) of the ex parte order) against defendant Chan Siu Chung limited to HK$28,798,000 and granted an ancillary disclosure order because plaintiffs established a good arguable case for breach of directors' duties, assets exist within the jurisdiction and a real risk of dissipation can be inferred from failures to comply with disclosure obligations; the court found insufficient evidence of a fraudulent conspiracy or of dissipation risk by Cheung Hiu Tung and therefore discharged the preservation order and refused to continue Mare…
10 Jun 2014

VTB DC LLC AND ANOTHER v. TOP FUEL CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

VTB DC LLC AND ANOTHER v. TOP FUEL CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1543/2013

The court granted the plaintiff's amended, particularised pre-action disclosure order against the 2nd defendant because the plaintiff demonstrated a reasonable basis for a potential claim, a close connection between the 2nd defendant and the relevant Faeton entities, and that the specified categories of documents for 2007–2013 were directly relevant and sufficiently particularised to meet the requirements of s41 High Court Ordinance; the original requests were too broad and required narrowing to defined categories and counterparties.
12 Mar 2002

MANUFACTURER\'S LIFE INSURANCE CO. OF CANADA v. HARVEST HERO INTERNATIONAL LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation

MANUFACTURER\'S LIFE INSURANCE CO. OF CANADA v. HARVEST HERO INTERNATIONAL LTD. AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV631/2001

The Court of Appeal held that Norwich Pharmacal relief at common law is available to aid potential foreign proceedings and is distinct from the statutory evidence regime; the plaintiff established necessity and a prima facie case to obtain identification and documents from the 1st defendant; concerns over self-incrimination could be accommodated by appropriate non-use undertakings (eg by the Secretary for Justice) and protective paragraphs; accordingly the appeal was allowed and the order dismissing the Norwich Pharmacal application was set aside.

Hong Kong Case Law

AESO HOLDING LTD AND ANOTHER v. DRAGON SUCCESS ENTERPRISE LTD AND OTHERS

VTB DC LLC AND ANOTHER v. TOP FUEL CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER

MANUFACTURER\'S LIFE INSURANCE CO. OF CANADA v. HARVEST HERO INTERNATIONAL LTD. AND OTHERS