Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Stay and dismissal

Legal area

Court

24 Oct 2025

GURDAS SABHAGCHAND CHOITHRAMANI v. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCA 921
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV86/2021

The plaintiff lacked standing because the causes of action accrued before his bankruptcies and vested in the Official Receiver as trustee in bankruptcy with no assignment or consent to the plaintiff; accordingly the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success and, given the plaintiff's impecuniosity and abuse of process, the court exercised its discretion to order security for costs in the sum of HK$420,000, stay the appeal pending payment, and provide for dismissal on default and summary assessment of the defendant's costs of the application.
26 Jun 2025

UNITED HARVEST INDUSTRIES LTD v. CHING MAN CHUN LOUIS AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2773
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA159/2022

The judge found there was a material change of circumstances (joining of the 3rd and 4th defendants, significant re-amendment alleging a new investment framework, and a substantial summary judgment application) which generated additional costs that could not reasonably have been anticipated when the earlier security was ordered; accordingly further security limited to costs referable to those changed circumstances was justified and HK$600,000 was fair and proportionate, so the master's dismissal was set aside and the appeal allowed.
15 Jan 2025

LAU KAM SING DICKIE v. ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD HKSAR INQUIRY COMMITTEE

Citation

[2025] HKCA 76
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV108/2024

Given the undisputed facts of Lau's adjudicated bankruptcy and a subsisting non‑commencement order the Court found special circumstances justifying security for costs; Lau failed to demonstrate sufficient countervailing factors because the Appeal was not shown to be so meritorious as to outweigh the impecuniosity; the Court exercised its discretion to order security of HKD 300,000 on a party‑to‑party basis, stayed the Appeal pending payment, and ordered dismissal in default and costs to the Board.
18 Jun 2024

DIMITRIOS KOUTSOLIOUTSOS AND ANOTHER v. LAI KAR YAN (DEREK) AND YIP WA MING (BEN), JOINT AND SEVERAL LIQUIDATORS OF FF GROUP SOURCING LTD (IN CREDITORS\' VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATION)

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1646
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1083/2023

Applicants are ordinarily resident abroad, appear to have no assets in Hong Kong, there is no enforcement convention with Greece, and they failed to file any evidential material or prosecute the summons diligently; accordingly it was just to order security for costs in the sum of HK$700,000, stay proceedings pending payment and dismissal if security is not provided, together with costs orders on an indemnity basis assessed at HK$140,000 (nisi).
3 Aug 2022

RE LO TAK WING BENSON

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1125
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV26/2022

The court refused to strike out the notice of appeal because it was not plain and obvious on the face of the notice that the appeal was incompetent or an abuse of process; however, because the debtor is shown to be impecunious and the appeal lacks substantial prospects of success or countervailing circumstances, the court exercised its discretion to order security for costs of HK$116,000 to be paid into court within 28 days and stayed the appeal until security is given, with dismissal consequences for default.
18 Nov 2019

PACIFIC ANDES ENTERPRISES (BVI) LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. NG JOO SIANG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2862
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA688/2019

Because the plaintiffs are in liquidation and failed to provide cogent, particularized evidence of assets or prospects of success while the liquidators are outside the jurisdiction, the court exercised its discretion to require the exact security sums claimed as just and proportionate; failure to pay will lead to stay or dismissal and costs to defendants.
22 Jun 2016

EXCELLENT RICH SERVICES LTD v. TSANG KIN ON

Citation

EXCELLENT RICH SERVICES LTD v. TSANG KIN ON
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4699/2014

Because the plaintiff is a recently incorporated company with nominal capital and filed no evidence to rebut the defendant's contention that it lacks resources, and because there was no evidence that an order would stifle the claim, it was just to order security for costs of HK$95,000 to be paid into court within 28 days; the action is stayed pending payment and will be dismissed with costs if payment is not made.
13 May 2016

MARCUS PRAETORIUS AND OTHERS v. HEAD ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN LTD

Citation

MARCUS PRAETORIUS AND OTHERS v. HEAD ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1057/2013

The master’s order was correctly construed as a joint and several order for security for costs in the sum of HK$700,000; the defendant’s collective evidence met the threshold under Companies Ordinance s905 to shift the evidential burden to the 3rd plaintiff which did not discharge it; disclosure of the sanctioned payment was unnecessary and, in any event, would not have altered the exercise of the court’s discretion; accordingly the appeal was dismissed and the security order upheld.
19 Jan 2015

ASIA-PAC INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS v. SHEARMAN & STERLING (a firm) AND OTHERS

Citation

ASIA-PAC INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS v. SHEARMAN & STERLING (a firm) AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA806/2006

Extension of time was granted but limited to 13 February 2015 (date fixed for hearing of leave to appeal) because the latest letter from True Treasure provided a sufficient prospect that the ordered security would be paid but the evidence did not justify a longer extension; other proposed funding sources and ATE evidence were speculative and insufficient; defendants entitled to costs of the application on party-and-party basis.