Haitong International Securities Company Ltd v. China Create Capital Ltd

HCA 1333/2020&
HCA 2123/2020&
HCA 291/2021
(Heard Together)

[2025] HKCFI 6482

HCA 1333/2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1333 OF 2020

____________

____________

AND

HCA 2123/2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 2123 OF 2020

____________

____________

AND

HCA 291/2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 291 OF 2021

____________

____________

(Heard Together)

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

1.The Plaintiffs in these 3 actions are judgment creditors of the Defendant. They obtained garnishee orders nisi and a charging order nisi to enforce the judgments against the Defendant. The garnishee is CCB International Securities Limited. This is the hearing to make those orders nisi absolute.

2.The papers have been served on the Defendant and the garnishee. The Defendant has not responded. The garnishee has no opposition. I am satisfied that I can proceed in the absence of the Defendant.

3.The Plaintiffs have obtained final judgment against the Defendant as follows:

Action	Date
HCA 1333/2020	30.9.2020
HCA 2123/2020	10.5.2021
HCA 291/2021	16.6.2021

4.Following on, the Plaintiffs obtained the subject garnishee orders nisi and charging order nisi:

Action	Date	Nature of Order
HCA 1333/2020	18.12.2023	GO & CO
HCA 2123/2020	12.11.2023	GO
HCA 291/2021	12.12.2023	GO

5.There had been various third parties who wished to make claims against the Defendant. Injunctions have been obtained by Jin Jiang Investment Ltd and Trustees in Bankruptcy of Shum Tin Ching in HCA 196/2021; Alltogether Land Company Limited in HCA 883/2020; and Sky Motion Holdings Ltd in HCA 1151/2019 respectively. The injunctions obtained by Alltogether and Sky Motion are not proprietary in nature. However, the injunctions obtained by Jin Jiang and the Trustees in Bankruptcy of Shum are proprietary in nature and those third parties have sought to intervene in HCA 1333/2020 to contest the garnishee orders nisi and charging order nisi.

6.Leave has been given by Master Jack Wong on 30 March 2022 for Alltogether to withdraw its intervention summonses in HCA 291/2021 and HCA 2123/2020. The Plaintiffs are in the process of obtaining a consent summons from Alltogether to vary the injunction in HCA 883/2020.

7.In respect of HCA 1333/2020, Jin Jiang, and the Trustees in Bankruptcy of Shum have withdrawn their joinder summons. They no longer oppose the making of the garnishee orders nisi and charging order nisi absolute.

8.A Mareva injunction does not create an interest or confer priority or proprietary interest on the party who obtained the injunction. Nor would it have the effect of preventing the garnishee orders nisi and charging order nisi from being made absolute: Clearflow Commercial Finance v ATL Power Systems, HCA 750/2017, 13.07.2017, DHCJ Joseph Kwan. In any event, Sky Motion and Alltogether are not parties to any of the 3 Actions and have not been joined to oppose the garnishee orders nisi and charging order nisi.

9.I am satisfied that the garnishee orders nisi and charging order nisi can be made absolute and the Injunctions obtained by the Plaintiffs in the present 3 cases can be varied to enable the Plaintiff to obtain and/or sell the Defendant’s assets.

10.I therefore order as follows:

(1)  The garnishee orders nisi and charging order nisi in the Actions be made absolute;

(2)  Costs of the garnishee order nisi at $5,200 each and of the charging order nisi at $9,100 be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff of each Action;

(3)  An order in terms of the consent summons by Jin Jiang and the Plaintiffs (judgment creditors) to vary the Injunction in HCA 196/2021; and

(4)  An order in terms of the consent summons by the Trustees in Bankruptcy of Shum and the Plaintiffs (judgment creditors) to vary the Injunction in HCA 196/2021;

(5)  An order in terms of the consent summons by Sky Motion and the Plaintiffs (judgment creditors) to vary the Injunction in HCA 1151/2019.

11.I thank Mr Sik for his assistance.

Mr Sik Chee Ching, instructed by DLA Piper Hong Kong, for the Plaintiff in all cases

The Defendant/Judgment Debtor in all cases was not represented and did not appear

Garnishee in all three cases was not represented and did not appear

DLA Piper for the Intended 1^st and 2^nd Interveners in HCA 196/2021 and HCA 1151/2019 did not appear

Au and Vrijmoed for the Intended 1^st Intervener in HCA 1333/2020 did not appear

Stevenson, Wong & Co., for the Intended 2^nd Intervener in HCA 1333/2020 did not appear