Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sale of securities

Legal area

Court

20 Feb 2019

HAITONG INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES CO LTD v. JIN YONG INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 460
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2025/2016

Although procedural service in the PRC complied with Order 11, the evidence showed service was taken by an employee at D3's residence and there was no evidence the documents reached D3 who was under residential surveillance and effectively unable to receive notice; applying the principle that judgment cannot stand where the defendant had no fair opportunity to be heard (Fok Chun Hung), the default judgment was set aside unconditionally and no payment-into-court condition was imposed.
3 May 2018

RE THE JOINT AND SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF CHINA POINT STOCK BROKERS LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1106
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP297/2018

The court accepted that the assets were held on trust by the broker and, given reasonable but unsuccessful efforts to contact beneficiaries, granted leave under s56 Trustee Ordinance to sell or otherwise deal with the unclaimed and abandoned trust assets, permitted pooling of proceeds to pay the liquidators' proper fees and expenses and ordered the balance to be paid into court under s62; it also authorized withdrawal of share certificates to lodge with the Registrar after three months and permitted dispensation of certain procedural requirements subject to advertisement.
8 Feb 1996

THE QUEEN v. YEUNG YEE HING

Citation

THE QUEEN v. YEUNG YEE HING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1097/1995

Given the appellant's position as a securities dealer, his trading pattern and admissions, the magistrate reasonably inferred he knew the quantity of stock he held and that selling without stock available demonstrated deliberate dishonesty; therefore the Crown proved the offence under s.80(1)&(2) and the conviction is properly upheld.
24 Oct 1991

SUN HUNG KAI INVESTMENT SERVICES LTD. AND ANOTHER v. FUNG TAK SING

Citation

SUN HUNG KAI INVESTMENT SERVICES LTD. AND ANOTHER v. FUNG TAK SING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1554/1989

The broker was the customer's agent and created privity of contract by executing the order; the bank was not the customer's agent; the customer is therefore liable to reimburse and indemnify the broker for the executed purchase; the broker's reporting mistakes did not discharge that liability; the bank by settlement became equitable assignee to the extent of one half of the broker's claim, entitling the plaintiffs to pursue recovery against the customer.
11 Aug 1986

CHAN KING HAR v. MANSION HOUSE SECURITIES LIMITED AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHAN KING HAR v. MANSION HOUSE SECURITIES LIMITED AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA8142/1984

Defendant received actual notice (via bank advices and subsequent admissions) that the funds used to purchase the third lot of bonds were remitted by Plaintiff for her purchase; having that notice Defendant was not entitled to treat or sell those bonds to meet Kam Shing's indebtedness — sale constituted conversion — Plaintiff entitled to damages and to trace the supplementary cheque funds; concurrently, CWT had ostensible authority to bind Kam Shing to its dealings with Defendant, so Defendant's indemnity claim against Kam Shing for liabilities to Plaintiff succeeds for the stated book debt.

Hong Kong Case Law

HAITONG INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES CO LTD v. JIN YONG INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

RE THE JOINT AND SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF CHINA POINT STOCK BROKERS LTD

THE QUEEN v. YEUNG YEE HING

SUN HUNG KAI INVESTMENT SERVICES LTD. AND ANOTHER v. FUNG TAK SING

CHAN KING HAR v. MANSION HOUSE SECURITIES LIMITED AND ANOTHER