Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Reciprocal enforcement of foreign judgments

Legal area

Court

8 Jan 2025

BEIJING SONGXIANGHU ARCHITECTURAL DECORATION ENGINEERING CO LTD v. KITTY KAM also known as WANG YUZHI

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 219
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1289/2022

The court released the plaintiff from the undertaking to the extent of enforcing the Part Judgment outside Hong Kong and granted the 2nd Unless Order: unless the defendant complies with the disclosure order by 4 p.m. on 20 January 2025 the defendant will be debarred from defending as to HK$49,586,000 and the plaintiff may enter judgment for that sum. The court held that requiring proof of foreign assets was unnecessary where enforcement of an existing judgment is sought, the sanction was proportionate and was limited so as not to give rise to double recovery or offend res judicata, and there…
26 Sept 2023

ZL v. WY AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2447
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP948/2020

The Court held that leave to appeal was required for an interlocutory s.21M decision and refused leave because the proposed appeal lacked reasonable prospects of success on the evidence before the court (the Wife's later affidavits were excluded as new evidence failing Ladd v Marshall); consequently no stay was granted beyond a limited 35‑day interim period and the continuation summonses were dismissed with costs ordered against the Wife.
30 Nov 2021

KAEFER A.G. v. WINFIELD MARINE SERVICES CO., LTD

Citation

[2021] HKDC 1442
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4320/2019

Leave to appeal and stay were refused because the defendant failed to show reasonable prospects of success: the bona fide purchaser defence was not pleaded and was properly excluded; the ‘Ah Po’ evidence was unreliable and the defendant offered no adequate explanation; the change of position defence lacked necessary causal reliance and was unarguable given the convertibility to a chose in action; the defendant failed to prove practical enforcement difficulties in Germany despite the FJREO; and the securities/merits balance favoured the plaintiff.
2 Jul 2020

KAEFER A G v. WINFIELD MARINE SERVICES CO LTD

Citation

[2020] HKDC 487
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4320/2019

Although the plaintiff is a foreign company with no Hong Kong assets, on the pleadings the plaintiff demonstrated a very high probability of success and the defendant's change of position defence was defective and insufficiently particularized; the existence of a reciprocal enforcement arrangement with Germany did not, by itself, negate the need to assess merits and enforcement difficulty; accordingly it was not just to order security for costs and the defendant's summons was dismissed while the plaintiff's discovery summons was granted.
31 May 2012

LIM YI SHENN v. WONG YUEN YEE AND OTHERS

Citation

LIM YI SHENN v. WONG YUEN YEE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1323/2010

Recorder refused the Defendants' appeal and upheld the Master's refusal to order security for costs because (a) the plaintiff could not adduce additional affirmations on appeal where no cross-appeal was brought against the Master's refusal to admit them; (b) O.23 r.1(1)(a) is not rendered discriminatory by the Hong Kong Bill of Rights such that the Court's discretion is fettered; and (c) on the available evidence there was substantial reciprocity with Singapore and no evidence of enforcement difficulty or plaintiff impecuniosity sufficient to make it just to order security for costs.

Hong Kong Case Law

BEIJING SONGXIANGHU ARCHITECTURAL DECORATION ENGINEERING CO LTD v. KITTY KAM also known as WANG YUZHI

ZL v. WY AND OTHERS

KAEFER A.G. v. WINFIELD MARINE SERVICES CO., LTD

KAEFER A G v. WINFIELD MARINE SERVICES CO LTD

LIM YI SHENN v. WONG YUEN YEE AND OTHERS