Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Unlawful interference with business

Legal area

Court

20 Jan 2012

ADCO ENTERPRISES LTD v.PETS CENTRAL (HK) LTD

Citation

ADCO ENTERPRISES LTD v.PETS CENTRAL (HK) LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV253/2011

On the evidence and pleadings there was no basis to attribute the pleaded acts of nuisance or unlawful interference to ADCO or Chan and no prima facie evidence of a conspiracy involving them to deprive PC of contractual rights; therefore the counterclaim against ADCO and Chan disclosed no reasonable cause of action and should be struck out.
21 Jun 2011

NOBLE SPIRIT LTD t/a LIFE SOLUTIONS v. WONG SHU YUEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

NOBLE SPIRIT LTD t/a LIFE SOLUTIONS v. WONG SHU YUEN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA842/2011

The court refused broad interlocutory injunctions restraining publication of alleged injurious falsehoods because there were triable issues as to truth/justification and no clear evidence of an intent to repeat such statements, but granted a limited interim injunction restraining defendants from using specified confidential information (names, addresses and other personal contacts of Mr Ireland not affiliated with the parties) taken from plaintiff computers because misuse of that confidential information was established on the provisional material and the balance of convenience favoured restr…
31 Dec 2010

SHENZHEN FUTAIHONG PRECISION INDUSTRY CO LTD AND OTHERS v. BYD CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

SHENZHEN FUTAIHONG PRECISION INDUSTRY CO LTD AND OTHERS v. BYD CO LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2114/2007

Leave to appeal was granted because the court found that the Foxconn Parties demonstrated a reasonable prospect of success on appeal: doubts exist whether the pleaded allegations (a) disclose an actionable cause of unlawful interference in the absence of pleaded loss or successful result, and (b) are duplicative of the BYD Parties' libel and slander counterclaim; these are matters suitable for appellate consideration rather than premature strike out.
28 Apr 2009

CHESAPEAKE ASIA-PACIFIC LTD v. NIRVANA (ASIA) LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

CHESAPEAKE ASIA-PACIFIC LTD v. NIRVANA (ASIA) LTD AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2941/2006

The non-competition clause was wider than necessary because it contained no temporal limit and therefore constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade that the court could not sever or rewrite; as that clause was invalid, claims dependent on it (inducing breach, unlawful interference, conspiracy) failed. Additionally, evidence was insufficient to establish that the 2nd Defendant knowingly induced breach or acted as agent for the 1st Defendant, and the PAC Team Group had in fact initiated direct dealings.
18 Jun 2007

HUMMINGBIRD MUSIC LTD v. DINO ACCONCI AND ANOTHER

Citation

HUMMINGBIRD MUSIC LTD v. DINO ACCONCI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA836/2007

Plaintiff's interlocutory application was refused because there was no realistic prospect of obtaining a permanent injunction that would effectively compel personal performance, and no special justification for an interlocutory injunction that would operate as a veto over defendants' work; defendants' cross-application was also refused because a gagging injunction would unduly interfere with plaintiff's bona fide right to assert its legal position and balance of convenience favored refusal, with the appropriate remedy being a speedy trial; parties ordered to give undertakings and directions n…
29 Jun 2006

AXA CHINA REGION INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. PACIFIC CENTURY INSURANCE CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

AXA CHINA REGION INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. PACIFIC CENTURY INSURANCE CO LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA9093/2000

The application to set aside the regular default judgment was dismissed because the 40th defendant failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success; the court found her account inherently incredible, formed a provisional view against her on the evidence, and therefore upheld the default judgment and awarded costs to the plaintiffs.
1 Feb 2000

CABLE & WIRELESS HKT TELEPHONE LTD. AND ANOTHER v. CITY TELECOM (H.K.) LTD.

Citation

CABLE & WIRELESS HKT TELEPHONE LTD. AND ANOTHER v. CITY TELECOM (H.K.) LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV197/1999

The appeal was dismissed because the defendant failed to establish at this interlocutory stage a sufficient likelihood that discovery would be misused to justify a split trial; overlapping relevance of documents to liability and damages and availability of confidentiality safeguards make a split trial unnecessary, and the trial judge's discretionary case management decision should not be disturbed absent error of principle or clear wrong.

Hong Kong Case Law

ADCO ENTERPRISES LTD v.PETS CENTRAL (HK) LTD

NOBLE SPIRIT LTD t/a LIFE SOLUTIONS v. WONG SHU YUEN AND ANOTHER

SHENZHEN FUTAIHONG PRECISION INDUSTRY CO LTD AND OTHERS v. BYD CO LTD AND OTHERS

CHESAPEAKE ASIA-PACIFIC LTD v. NIRVANA (ASIA) LTD AND OTHERS

HUMMINGBIRD MUSIC LTD v. DINO ACCONCI AND ANOTHER

AXA CHINA REGION INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. PACIFIC CENTURY INSURANCE CO LTD AND OTHERS

CABLE & WIRELESS HKT TELEPHONE LTD. AND ANOTHER v. CITY TELECOM (H.K.) LTD.