Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interim preservation order

Legal area

Court

29 Dec 2023

G v. N

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3366
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT52/2023

The court held that it has the limited supervisory power to determine whether an award conflicts with Hong Kong public policy as currently understood (Patel/Monat) without re-opening the arbitrator's factual or legal findings; because the arbitrator did not apply the Patel/Monat framework the court suspended the setting aside proceedings and remitted the matter to the arbitrator under Article 34(4) for reconsideration; the challenge under clause 6.10(e) was dismissed as not jurisdictional and waived for failure to raise in arbitration; the interim preservation order was continued.
29 Dec 2023

G v. N

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3366
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT28/2023

Where an award denies relief because of illegality the supervisory court must assess whether enforcing the award would now conflict with Hong Kong public policy as currently understood (Patel/Monat); errors by a tribunal in characterising public policy may justify suspension and remission under Article 34(4) rather than immediate setting aside; however contractual limits on remedies (clause 6.10(e)) are matters of construction and not jurisdictional if not timely pleaded, so that ground for setting aside was dismissed.
19 Sept 2019

LEUNG YIU TING v. MTR CORPORATION LTD

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2321
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1441/2019

s42 could not be relied upon because the plaintiff had not commenced proceedings; the plaintiff proceeded on Norwich Pharmacal equitable jurisdiction; notwithstanding procedural form issues, the court would proceed and exercise its jurisdiction to grant interim preservation relief to secure the CCTV footage pending determination of the disclosure application; directions were given for evidence exchange and hearing adjournment; MTRC was ordered to preserve the specified CCTV footage but no further restraint against meddling or disclosure was made at this interim stage.
15 Mar 2019

WAH SUN HONG LTD v. WONG LEE YUK PING AGNES

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 993
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA333/2016

CKC, as a third party, was not so unreasonable in failing to give a specific undertaking that it should be ordered to bear part of the costs; given the lack of specificity in the plaintiff's letter, the onerous confidentiality term, the seven‑year retention issue, and that CKC ultimately agreed to the court order, it was inappropriate to make a costs order against CKC.

Hong Kong Case Law

G v. N

G v. N

LEUNG YIU TING v. MTR CORPORATION LTD

WAH SUN HONG LTD v. WONG LEE YUK PING AGNES