Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Post-termination restrictions

Legal area

Court

19 Sept 2024

CONPAK MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS LTD v. LUK WAI TING

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1545
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3016/2021

Plaintiff failed to prove that the client contacts or the contents of the forwarded emails had the requisite quality of confidence; other than disclosure to APEC Tax in respect of Angenvoort there was no evidence of misuse to third parties or diversion of business (no engagement by Tom Lee); any conflict of interest in drafting existed but did not result in diverted business or profit; accordingly no breach warranting injunctive relief or account of profits was established and the plaintiff's action is dismissed.
23 Jun 2015

GFI (HK) SECURITIES LLC v. GYONG HEE KANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

GFI (HK) SECURITIES LLC v. GYONG HEE KANG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1319/2015

The court held that GFI demonstrated a serious question to be tried and had reasonably good prospects of success that the non-dealing and non-solicitation covenants were enforceable to protect legitimate commercial interests (client connections and confidential information); GFI did not unduly delay in bringing the application, damages would be an inadequate remedy for loss of client connections/confidential information while the restraint subsisted, and the balance of convenience favoured granting an interlocutory injunction (non-compete was abandoned).
20 Oct 2008

PCCW - HKT TELEPHONE LTD AND ANOTHER v. DAVID MATTHEW MCDONALD AITKEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

PCCW - HKT TELEPHONE LTD AND ANOTHER v. DAVID MATTHEW MCDONALD AITKEN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV194/2008

By majority the court refused leave to the Court of Final Appeal because the plaintiff's broad proposition extending legal professional privilege to any person was, in the majority's view, not a suitable interlocutory question of sufficient general or public importance, was fact-sensitive and possibly unarguable, and the plaintiff had not identified privileged or confidential information with sufficient specificity; the court exercised its discretion to refuse leave and noted trial would better determine factual issues.
22 Feb 2006

FIMAT HONG KONG LTD v. TUBIANA FREDERIC ANTOINE AND OTHERS

Citation

FIMAT HONG KONG LTD v. TUBIANA FREDERIC ANTOINE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA268/2006

There was a serious question to be tried on the enforceability of the 12-month post-termination restraints; Fimat HK demonstrated legitimate protectable interests and that damages would not be an adequate remedy; the balance of convenience favored preserving the status quo by granting interlocutory relief pending a speedy trial. The court severed the words 'similar to' from the non-solicitation and non-dealing clauses and substituted 'until further order of the court' for the fixed 12-month phrase in the interlocutory order.
28 Nov 1984

MIDLAND REALTY INTERNATIONAL LTD v. IP YUK WO, WARREN AND OTHERS

Citation

MIDLAND REALTY INTERNATIONAL LTD v. IP YUK WO, WARREN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7680/1984

The court held that while the plaintiff's control sheets involved effort and were prima facie confidential, their value to departing employees was short‑lived and there was no evidence defendants had used or copied confidential records or solicited clients; persons who merely list property with agents are not necessarily customers; therefore broad restraints were unreasonable but limited interlocutory injunctions protecting actual transacted clients for defined post‑termination periods were justified.

Hong Kong Case Law

CONPAK MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS LTD v. LUK WAI TING

GFI (HK) SECURITIES LLC v. GYONG HEE KANG AND ANOTHER

PCCW - HKT TELEPHONE LTD AND ANOTHER v. DAVID MATTHEW MCDONALD AITKEN AND ANOTHER

FIMAT HONG KONG LTD v. TUBIANA FREDERIC ANTOINE AND OTHERS

MIDLAND REALTY INTERNATIONAL LTD v. IP YUK WO, WARREN AND OTHERS