Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Impecuniosity and disclosure

Legal area

Court

25 Nov 2024

XUE XIAOYUN v. WU SHANG YING

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2860
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1823/2022

Because the defendant did not make full and frank disclosure and was clearly able to satisfy the sum, the court ordered the entire US$8,292,000 (received dividends) to be paid into court in staged payments and imposed restraints and procurement obligations as conditions for leave to defend; a charge over the disputed shares and separate security for costs were unnecessary given the imposed conditions.
24 Mar 2017

HOTUNG INVESTMENT (CHINA) LTD v. ERIC SHEA KIM HOTUNG

Citation

HOTUNG INVESTMENT (CHINA) LTD v. ERIC SHEA KIM HOTUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA77/2012

The judge found the defendant’s defences to the ownership of the specific lot of 300 American Eagle gold coins and the Ivory Screen were shadowy and that the master properly imposed a financial condition; the defendant had failed to disclose means to establish impossibility of payment, but the appeal allowed in part to reduce the sum to be paid into court to HK$481,640, set aside the January 13 2017 judgment and granted conditional leave to defend if that sum is paid within 28 days, with detailed fallback orders if payment is not made.
17 Jul 2013

CHEUNG CHI PO v. KE JUN XIANG

Citation

CHEUNG CHI PO v. KE JUN XIANG
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV37/2012

Leave to appeal was refused because the Court of Appeal's decision did not raise a question of law of great general or public importance but involved the proper exercise of judicial discretion; additionally the applicant failed to provide evidence of impecuniosity and full and frank disclosure before the lower courts and therefore could not challenge the financial condition imposed by the Court of Appeal.
30 May 1985

HWANG YIOU KWA, VICTOR AND ANOTHER v. MORGAN GUARANTY TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK

Citation

HWANG YIOU KWA, VICTOR AND ANOTHER v. MORGAN GUARANTY TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV78/1985

The Court allowed the appeal and exercised its discretion after reviewing the defendants' affirmations of means, concluding the original condition (HK$11,600,000) was disproportionate and potentially impossible to fulfil; it substituted a reasonable sum (HK$500,000) to secure conditional leave to defend, applying the principle from M.V. Yorke Motors that the court should not impose impossible financial conditions and that the defendant must provide proper evidence of impecuniosity.

Hong Kong Case Law

XUE XIAOYUN v. WU SHANG YING

HOTUNG INVESTMENT (CHINA) LTD v. ERIC SHEA KIM HOTUNG

CHEUNG CHI PO v. KE JUN XIANG

HWANG YIOU KWA, VICTOR AND ANOTHER v. MORGAN GUARANTY TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK