Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Third party litigation funding

Legal area

Court

28 Nov 2023

POLYLINE DEVELOPMENT LTD (in liquidation) v. CHING LIN CHUEN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3049
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2319/2019

s.905 Companies Ordinance was engaged because the plaintiff in liquidation and its third party funder would not meet adverse costs; the court should exercise its discretion to order security because the merits were not so strong as to preclude an order and ordering security would not unreasonably stifle the action; on a broad‑brush assessment the just sum to secure defendants' costs to discovery was HK$2.8 million; proceedings stayed until payment and dismissal ordered on default.
12 Jan 2021

SUNNI INTERNATIONAL LTD v. KAO WAI HO FRANCIS AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 79
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1884/2018

The plaintiff, being a BVI company in liquidation with evidence of substantial proofs of debt and admitted lack of assets, failed to rebut the presumption of inability to pay defendants' costs; the availability of potential non-party funders under s 52A does not replace the primary remedy of security for costs; delay by defendants was not sufficient to defeat the application; the proposed security in the form of AFH share interests was not readily realisable and therefore inadequate; applying a broad brush reduction to the defendants' bill the court fixed just security at HK$8.4 million and o…
1 Sept 2009

AKAI HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. HO WING ON, CHRISTOPHER

Citation

AKAI HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. HO WING ON, CHRISTOPHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL40/2005

Given the evidence of continued and flagrant breaches of the Mareva/disclosure Order, the demonstrable substantive control by Mr Ho over assets held in trusts and corporate entities, and the real and urgent risk of further dissipation which cannot be remedied satisfactorily by less intrusive measures, the court held that the appointment of receivers was just, convenient and proportionate as ancillary relief to the Mareva Order; accordingly the receivership order was granted with targeted amendments and limited interim relief only by way of a short stay pending appellate arrangements.
9 Feb 2009

AKAI HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS v. HO WING ON, CHRISTOPHER AND OTHERS

Citation

AKAI HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS v. HO WING ON, CHRISTOPHER AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL40/2005

Court held plaintiffs have a good arguable case and established a real risk of dissipation primarily on evidence of recent asset disposals (notably the Lafe in specie distribution) and other transactions; granted a worldwide Mareva injunction against the 1st defendant, Mr Christopher Ho, limited to US$200,000,000 and ancillary disclosure; refused direct Mareva relief against the 2nd defendant, Grande Holdings Ltd, but restrained Mr Ho from using his beneficial interest to procure extraordinary dispositions of Grande assets outside the ordinary course without board approval and required 14 day…

Hong Kong Case Law

POLYLINE DEVELOPMENT LTD (in liquidation) v. CHING LIN CHUEN AND OTHERS

SUNNI INTERNATIONAL LTD v. KAO WAI HO FRANCIS AND ANOTHER

AKAI HOLDINGS LTD (IN COMPULSORY LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. HO WING ON, CHRISTOPHER

AKAI HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS v. HO WING ON, CHRISTOPHER AND OTHERS