Leung Yuet Keung v. Harbour Front Ltd and Another

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 1471/2019 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 22 July 2024.

1. I have before me a summons dated 15 July 2024 by which the 1 st Respondent seeks an order that there be a stay of execution of my judgment handed down on 11 June 2024 pending the outcome of an appeal from the judgment.

Cites 2 cases

Case No.HCMP 1471/2019[2024] HKCFI 1965
Court
High Court CFI
Date22 Jul 2024
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP 1471/2019

[2024] HKCFI 1965

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 1471 OF 2019

________________

  IN THE MATTER OF ss.722 to 726 of the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 622 of the Laws of Hong Kong
  and
  IN THE MATTER OF Money Facts Limited

________________

BETWEEN

  LEUNG YUET KEUNG Petitioner
  and  
  HARBOUR FRONT LIMITED 1st Respondent
  MONEY FACTS LTD 2nd Respondent

________________

Before: Hon Harris J in Chambers
Date of Hearing: 22 July 2024
Date of Decision: 22 July 2024

_________________

D E C I S I O N

_________________

1.I have before me a summons dated 15 July 2024 by which the 1st Respondent seeks an order that there be a stay of execution of my judgment handed down on 11 June 2024 pending the outcome of an appeal from the judgment.

2.The principles by reference to which the court determines an application for a stay of execution pending an appeal are not controversial. They had most recently been set out in [22] of Cheung JA’s judgment in Capital Century Textile Company Limited v Li Dianxiao[1].

3.I am not satisfied that the 1st Respondent has demonstrated there are strong grounds of appeal in the present case. Neither am I satisfied that the appeal will be rendered nugatory unless a stay is granted. The judgment determined liability in this shareholders dispute. I think given the history of this matter, it is desirable and sensible that the process leading to the valuation of the shares to be purchased by the 1st Respondent proceeds.

4.I would not anticipate that completion of the purchase take place until after any appeal is determined. In those circumstances I do not think it is correct to categorise the present position as one in which unless a stay is granted, the purpose of the appeal is fundamentally undermined.

5.I will, therefore, dismiss the application. I assess on a summary basis the Petitioner’s costs at HK$65,000.

  (Jonathan Harris)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Mr Kwan Ping Kan, instructed by Ho & Ip, for the Petitioner

Mr Clifford Smith SC and Mr Arthur Poon, instructed by Yiu & Associates, Solicitors, for the 1st Respondent