Read the full judgment text of HCCT 53/2017 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 8 December 2020 before Hon Linda Chan J in Chambers.
Equity — Enforcement of foreign arbitral award — Appointment of receivers over shares — Mareva injunction — Chabra jurisdiction — Asset dissipation — Fiduciary duties — Corporate control — Powers of receivership — Enforcement difficulties. Judgment creditor Paloma sought appointment of receivers over shares held by Debtor Capxon and continuation of Mareva injunction against Lancom and Listco. The court applied principles from Cruz City v Unitech concerning appointment of receivers by way of equitable execution, finding a reasonable prospect that receivership would assist in enforcing the judgment due to illiquidity of assets and unwillingness of controlling directors to recover debt. The Mareva injunction was refused as to Listco for lack of real risk of dissipation and held questionable to extend Chabra jurisdiction to indirect third parties. Injunction was maintained against Lancom pending receivership determination. Receiver powers limited to exercising voting rights and appointment as directors with litigation decisions reserved to directors. Costs awarded to the successful parties accordingly.
Legal issues: Appointment of receivers by way of equitable execution over shares · Continuation of Mareva injunction against Lancom and Listco · Powers and scope of appointed receivers
Outcome: Order appointing receivers over Lancom shares granted; Mareva injunction discontinued as to Listco but maintained against Lancom if necessary; costs orders awarded accordingly.
Cited by 8 cases · Cites 3 cases