Read the full judgment text of HCCT 96/2024 & HCCT 97/2024 & HCCT 98/2024 & HCCT 99/2024 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 29 April 2025 before Mr Recorder William Wong SC.
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards — Mareva Injunction — Receivership Application — Setting Aside Summons — Chabra Injunction — Disclosure and Asset Dissipation — Costs. The applicant, 周惠明, successfully sought enforcement of four arbitration awards dated 25 July 2024 against Sun Kwok Ping and 挪信新能源科技 (南通) 有限公司. Following refusal and withdrawal of attempts to set aside enforcement orders, and evidence of asset dissipation including non-disclosure and transfers to nominee, this Court continued worldwide Mareva injunctions and appointed interim receivers to protect and preserve respondent assets. The Court held respondents’ disclosures inadequate and their conduct indicated risk of dissipation. Chabra injunction was granted over nominee Zhang’s interest. The setting aside summons was dismissed with indemnity costs for tactical delay. The Court emphasized the practical inadequacy of Mareva injunctions requiring receivership, supported by case law such as JSC BTA Bank v A and China Metal Recycling Ltd, and recognized receivership as necessary form of equitable execution. Orders for costs were made on party-to-party and indemnity basis accordingly.
Legal issues: Continuation of Mareva Injunction · Granting Chabra Injunction Over Zhang’s Assets · Appointment of Interim Receivers · Costs order on setting aside summons
Outcome: Dismissal of setting aside summons with indemnity costs to applicant; continuation of Mareva injunctions; appointment of interim receivers over Sun, Noxin and Zhang’s relevant assets
Cited by 3 cases · Cites 9 cases