9 Dec 2019
LI KIN KEUNG v. YAT FAT LTD AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2977
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA341/2013
The court refused all stay applications because the appeal was not shown to be arguable given the trial judge's factual findings, the proffered new evidence failed the Ladd v Marshall requirements and would not render the appeal arguable, no satisfactory evidence of dissipation was produced and Li provided an undertaking regarding shares; accordingly, enforcement orders under Order 45 rr 6 and 8 were justified to fix compliance time and authorise execution of share transfer documents, with costs to follow the event.