Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Pecuniary penalty

Legal area

Court

11 Jan 2024

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCT 1
Court

Competition Tribunal
Case number

CTEA2/2022

The President refused leave to appeal because the timing of Kam Kwong applications is a discretionary case management decision raising no substantive point of law; directed that Kam Kwong applications be dealt with at or immediately after trial or when all respondents agree; held that a single composite fine across two proceedings is inappropriate and penalties must be calculated to avoid duplication; ordered disclosure of correspondence relating to cooperation agreements between two ATAL employees and the Commission and granted an interim stay of that disclosure decision pending ATAL's appli…
11 Jan 2024

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCT 1
Court

Competition Tribunal
Case number

CTEA2/2023

The President refused leave to appeal because the matters challenged were discretionary case management decisions without a material point of law; directed that Kam Kwong applications be determined at trial or when respondents agree; ordered disclosure of specified cooperation correspondence subject to an interim stay pending Court of Appeal leave application; and allocated costs (80% payable by the Commission, 20% by the 1st respondent to certain respondents).
26 Jul 2023

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. QUADIENT TECHNOLOGIES HONG KONG LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCT 6
Court

Competition Tribunal
Case number

CTEA1/2021

The Tribunal accepted the parties' joint application under Rule 39 to dispose of the enforcement proceedings on agreed facts, accepted the Parties' admissions that between 19 April 2018 and 23 January 2019 the respondents (through their representatives) entered into and gave effect to an agreement and concerted practice to fix prices, rig bids and allocate customers in respect of Neopost inserters in Hong Kong in contravention of s6(1) of the Competition Ordinance, that the conduct was serious anti‑competitive conduct, and that the conduct of identified employees was attributable to the corpo…
3 Nov 2020

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. QUANTR LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCT 10
Court

Competition Tribunal
Case number

CTEA1/2020

On the admitted facts the 1st Respondent engaged in an agreement/concerted practice amounting to price‑fixing in breach of the First Conduct Rule and the 2nd Respondent was involved under s.91; the Tribunal has power to make declarations, impose the agreed pecuniary penalty of HK$37,702.26 and to record and give effect to the parties’ consent settlement including the compliance schedule and stay of further proceedings, and to order costs to the Commission.
28 Jul 2020

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. W. HING CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

[2020] HKCT 6
Court

Competition Tribunal
Case number

CTEA2/2017

The Commission's 14-day delay in applying for leave to appeal costs was not objectively insubstantial or wholly excusable and, having failed to show a real prospect of success on the merits of the costs appeal or sufficient justification for three counsel, the extension of time and leave were refused; costs decisions are discretionary and the Tribunal's refusal of a certificate for three counsel did not amount to an error of principle.

Hong Kong Case Law

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LTD AND OTHERS

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LTD AND OTHERS

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. QUADIENT TECHNOLOGIES HONG KONG LTD AND OTHERS

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. QUANTR LTD AND ANOTHER

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. W. HING CONSTRUCTION CO LTD