Showing 1 - 10 of 23
Shortly after its “first of its kind” decision in Re CEFC Shanghai International Group Limited  HKCFI 167 delivered at the beginning of this year, the Hong Kong Court, in its most recent decision in Re Shenzhen Everich Supply Chain Co, Ltd  HKCFI 965, once again made an order recognising the liquidation of a PRC company (the “Company”) in the Mainland and the appointment of the Company’s administrator (the “Liquidator”) by the Shenzhen Court.
Inside information disclosure during suspension of trading: Mayer Holdings v Securities and Futures Commission
Certain actual or anticipated bad news cause the trading of a listed company’s shares to be suspended. More bad news then come along and are announced while trading in the company’s shares remains suspended.
In recent months, COVID-19 has led to a fundamental shift in the way we work. Millions of office workers are working from home or adopting flexible working arrangements on a daily basis. Meet-and-greet opportunities are completed over emails. Team meetings are conducted over video calls. This will be the “new normal” for a number of office workers in the foreseeable future.
Since the Civil Justice Reform (“CJR”), the courts have been highly critical of “stale” claims which have been inactive for years. In furthering the underlying objectives of CJR, in particular ensuring that the action is dealt with as expeditiously as reasonably practicable, the attitude of “letting the sleep dogs lie” (i.e. allowing inactive proceedings to remain dormant) is also no longer acceptable.
In December 2019, the Hong Kong Court delivered a groundbreaking decision in the case of Re CEFC Shanghai International Group Limited  HKCFI 167.
It’s that time of the year again when the Kennedys Hong Kong financial regulatory team puts out our annual review of financial regulatory investigations and proceedings.
Case review 17/12/2019
The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) recently handed down its judgment in Zhang Hong Li and others v DBS Bank (Hong Kong) Limited and others (FACV 2/2019) (22 November 2019) which reverses the findings by the Court of Appeal (“CA”) in respect of the breach of trust/fiduciary duties owed to sophisticated investment customers by the trustee and corporate services of a bank.
Case review 09/09/2019
In the recent case of Zenjoy Limited v Contex Group Co., Limited  HKCFI 2049, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“CFI”) dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for third party discovery where the Plaintiff was a victim of fraud. In doing so, CFI examined the rules in relation to non-party discovery under section 42(1) of the High Court Ordinance (Cap. 4) (“HCO”) and order 24 rule 7A(2) of the Rules of the High Court (“RHC”).
Addchance Limited v Herojoy Trading Limited  HKCFI 1147
It is well established that the court will grant an injunction to restrain the presentation of a winding-up petition which it considers would be an abuse of court’s process. Deputy High Court Judge Keith Yeung SC (“DHCJ Yeung”) revisited this principle in Addchance Limited v Herojoy Trading Limited where there were two sets of inconsistent accounting documents which respectively prove and disprove the existence of the debt.
On 2 April 2019, Hong Kong becomes the first jurisdiction outside the Mainland where, as a seat of arbitration, parties to arbitral proceedings administered by its arbitral institutions would be able to apply to the Mainland courts for interim measures (including property preservation, evidence preservation and conduct preservation).