12 Feb 2009
REM ASSETS LTD v. MIR INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- REM ASSETS LTD v. MIR INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA626/2008
The prohibition order was discharged because the court was not satisfied on the evidence that the defendant was about to leave Hong Kong and was satisfied that the defendant had a substantial defence to the plaintiff's claim, such that extension of the prohibition was not justified under s.21B and Order 44A.