Chang Man v. Ma Shou Yung

HCAP000009/2001

HCAP 9/2001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

PROBATE ACTION NO. 9 OF 2001

____________

____________

____________

Coram: Hon Chung J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 9 November 2001

Date of Decision: 9 November 2001

_______________

D E C I S I O N

_______________

1.The Plaintiff commenced this action alleging that the Defendant has been dishonest. The alleged dishonest acts include:

(1) intermeddling with the estate of the deceased before the Defendant became its administratrix;

(2) failing to duly account for the assets in the deceased's estate;

(3) failing to duly distribute the estate.

The allegations are denied by the Defendant.

2.The present application asks in essence for a Mareva injunction order (or an order of that nature). As Plaintiff's counsel fairly accepts at today's hearing, there is no evidence of the Defendant's dissipation of her assets. This concession is reflected in paragraph 7 of the affidavit of Ma Wah Yan Billy dated 23 October 2001.

3.The only alleged disposal of assets by the Defendant was the sale of the deceased's shares in 1995. Plaintiff's counsel informed me that this was known to the Plaintiff at around that time.

4.It is an essential ingredient in an application for a Mareva injunction that there is a real risk of dissipation of assets. None has been shown in this application. Plaintiff's counsel relies on the Honsaico Trading Limited case ([1990] 1 HKLR 235). The facts of that case are quite different from the present and do not advance the Plaintiff's argument in this application.

5.Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

Representation:

Mr Nelson Mui, instructed by Messrs Hobson & Ma, for the Plaintiff

Mr Arthur Au, of Messrs Arthur Au & Co., for the Defendant