Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Misappropriation of shares

Legal area

Court

16 Jul 2018

AMUSE PEACE LTD v. CHINA CITY CONSTRUCTION (INTERNATIONAL) CO. LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1644
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2913/2016

The defendant failed to particularise or provide credible evidence of a bona fide defence; the loan and cheque were established on the face of the pleading and verifying affidavit and prior findings in HCA 2814 rendered the alleged security and duress allegations unbelievable; summary judgment for the plaintiff was therefore appropriate.
26 Feb 2016

EXCEL COURAGE HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG SIN LAI, also known as WONG SIN LEI AND OTHERS

Citation

EXCEL COURAGE HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG SIN LAI, also known as WONG SIN LEI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL34/2013

The court found plaintiffs failed to prove Hung was beneficial owner but found Excel was the legal/beneficial owner of the Shares absent reliable evidence of D1's alleged Investment Agreement; Wong (D1) breached fiduciary duties by disposing of the Shares without authority; D2 and D5 dishonestly assisted the breach and are jointly and severally liable with D1; D3 and D4 were not shown to be dishonest; counterclaims dismissed; equitable compensation of HKD 283,780,800 awarded to Excel; shares/proceeds to be transferred to Excel and secured by injunctions addressed accordingly.
16 Jan 2012

POLESTAR ASSETS LTD v. ANTON CAPITAL LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

POLESTAR ASSETS LTD v. ANTON CAPITAL LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1836/2009

On the balance of probabilities the court preferred the defendants' account: the Third Party was the beneficial owner of the disputed shares; the Sale and Purchase Agreement and both Sold Notes were signed by Mr Chang in Macau on 2 May 2008; the Securities Settlement Instructions were signed by Chow on 4 August 2008; the plaintiff failed to prove misappropriation or forgery and the claims were therefore dismissed.
3 Nov 2008

DAT CHEE ROBERT v. RADLAND INTERNATIONAL LTD

Citation

DAT CHEE ROBERT v. RADLAND INTERNATIONAL LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1264/2008

The claim was not to be construed narrowly as pure conversion because it also pleaded contractual and fiduciary duties and documentary evidence plus the employee's guilty plea established the defendant's liability; accordingly interlocutory judgment was entered for the plaintiff with damages to be assessed by a Master, leaving only quantum unresolved.
2 Jan 2003

RE KENLY (HK) LTD.

Citation

RE KENLY (HK) LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW964/2002

The court dismissed the strike-out application. It held that (1) the locus challenge to the 2nd petitioner (Brian Cheng) could not be resolved on existing evidence and he should not be struck out in relation to s168A; (2) the factual allegations (forgery, dilution via rights issue, misleading audited accounts) disclose a cause of action for winding-up and it is not plain and obvious they will fail; and (3) given unresolved factual disputes and the distinct position of Brian Cheng, it was not appropriate to strike out the winding-up allegations as unreasonable; costs orders nisi were granted a…

Hong Kong Case Law

AMUSE PEACE LTD v. CHINA CITY CONSTRUCTION (INTERNATIONAL) CO. LTD

EXCEL COURAGE HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG SIN LAI, also known as WONG SIN LEI AND OTHERS

POLESTAR ASSETS LTD v. ANTON CAPITAL LTD AND ANOTHER

DAT CHEE ROBERT v. RADLAND INTERNATIONAL LTD

RE KENLY (HK) LTD.