Read the full judgment text of HCCT 45/2011 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 15 December 2011 before Deputy High Court Judge L. Chan in Chambers.
Construction and Arbitration — Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) — Share Purchase Agreement induced by alleged misrepresentations — Sum of US$22,297,629.60 transferred under Three Agreements involving loan arrangements — 5th defendant’s rights to use sum as ‘Comfort Money’ with obligation to repay — Interim Mareva injunction granted ex parte against 5th defendant blocked lawful use of funds and transfer obligation — 5th defendant gave undertaking to abide by Three Agreements — Plaintiff consented to discharge injunction but maintained claim — Court held no basis for interim relief or claim against 5th defendant, striking out claim and discharging injunction — Costs ordered against plaintiff on standard basis without indemnity scale. The case clarifies the limits of interim relief relating to funds held under complex loan and share purchase arrangements and the importance of respecting contractual term rights in arbitration context.
Legal issues: Basis for interim relief against 5th defendant · Whether to strike out plaintiff’s claim against 5th defendant · Costs of the proceedings against the 5th defendant
Outcome: The plaintiff’s claim against the 5th defendant is struck out; the Mareva injunction against the 5th defendant is discharged.
Cites 1 case