Disclaimer: These articles do not constitute legal advice and seek to set out the general principles of the law. Detailed advice should therefore be sought from a legal professional relating to the individual merits and facts of a particular case. The photographs included in this document are for decorative purposes only and should not be taken as a depiction of any matter related to the cases summarised. The views and opinions expressed in these articles are solely those of the members authoring them and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Denis Chang’s Chambers, or of any other member or members of Denis Chang’s Chambers.
Insights
This edition of DCC Commercial Digest features a selection of significant judgments released in October 2025. Curated by Abigail Liu and Ted Chan, this issue highlights six noteworthy cases, each accompanied by a concise summary. Our aim is to provide valuable insights into recent legal developments and enhance understanding of critical issues in commercial law.
Summary of Cases
Case 1: Approach to considering whether leave is required to appeal against decision to grant leave for amendment of statement of claim, after statement of claim being struck out
TDC Capital Solution Ltd v Wong Sung King Dorothy [2025] HKCFI 4617
Date of Decision: 2 October 2025
Coram: Deputy High Court Judge Nip SC in Chambers
After the Court struck out the Plaintiff’s SOC, liberty was given for it to lodge and serve the draft ASOC. The Defendant sought to appeal against the Court’s subsequent decision of granting leave to the Plaintiff to amend its SOC as per the draft ASOC with certain exceptions. The Court took into account a number of factors in this case, which involved both issues that require leave to appeal and also issues that do not require leave.
Case 2: The Court's jurisdiction on stop notices and stop orders under O.50 rr.11-15 of the Rules of the High Court
U K Prolific Petroleum Group Co Ltd v 鑫都集團有限公司 [2025] HKCFI 4769
Date of Decision: 9 October 2025
Coram: Recorder Suen SC
The Court confirmed its jurisdiction on granting stop notice/ stop order under O.50 rr.11-15 of the Rules of the High Court, even though there are no substantive proceedings in Hong Kong. The Court clarified the only restrictions imposed by the regime relate to (i) the type of securities and (ii) the locus of an applicant, being any person claiming to be entitled to an interest in such securities.
Case 3: Correct approach to evaluation of evidence even if Claimant has been acquitted in criminal court
Yape Liezel Suelto v Lee Alice Yu Ying [2025] HKCFI 4736
Date of Judgment: 10 October 2025
Coram: Hon Poon J
The Court highlighted the importance of making factual findings and resolving factual disputes, even though the criminal courts have rendered a verdict of acquittal on an overlapping issue with the civil proceedings.
Case 4: Jurisdiction to issue letter of request under Arrangement on Mutual Taking of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Matters between the Courts of Mainland and HK
Tenwow International Holdings Ltd (in liquidation) & Anor v PricewaterhouseCoopers & Anor [2025] HKCFA 17
Date of Judgment: 16 October 2025
Coram: Cheung CJ, Ribeiro PJ, Fok PJ, Lam PJ, Sir William Young NPJ
The Court of Final Appeal clarified the Hong Kong Court’s jurisdiction to issue a letter of request to a court in another jurisdiction (whether foreign or Mainland) to facilitate the production of documents in a party’s possession for litigation in Hong Kong, and the scope of the Arrangement on Mutual Taking of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Matters between the Courts of the Mainland and the Hong Kong SAR.
Case 5: Foreign winding-up proceedings and arbitration: novel construction of arbitration clause
Hyalroute Communication Group Ltd v ICBC (Asia) Ltd [2025] HKCA 936
Date of Judgment: 21 October 2025
Coram: Hon Chu VP and Anthony Chan JA
The Court of First Instance has previously refused to grant anti-suit injunction restraining winding up in the Cayman Islands. Though finding that the applicant’s argument over the term “finally resolved” under the arbitration agreement was reasonably arguable, the Court of Appeal has declined the renewed application for injunction pending appeal.
Case 6: Interest liability in interpleader proceedings
Charm Master Enterprises Ltd v Grand T G Gold Holdings Ltd & J Thomson Asset Investment Limited [2025] HKCFI 4992
Date of Judgment: 24 October 2025
Coram: Hon Cheng J
The Court confirmed an interpleader’s interest liability under section 48 of the High Court Ordinance (Cap4) where funds paid into court was directed to be paid out to the defendant, thereby rejecting the interpleader’s competing claim for repayment.