Date of Decision: 2 October 2026

Coram: Au and Coleman JJA

The Court of Appeal granted a conditional stay of an order requiring a firm of solicitors to deliver documents to its former client, SIL, pending an appeal by CNG, another former client which had separately retained the firm in the same arbitration and asserted privilege over certain documents. CNG’s principal ground concerning SIL’s entitlement to the documents just met the reasonable-prospects-of-success threshold, and delivery up risked rendering the appeal nugatory. The stay was therefore granted on condition that the appeal be immediately set down for hearing.

Date of Judgment: 8 October 2026

Coram: Chu VP, Barma and G Lam JJA

The Court of Appeal dismissed a bankruptcy trustees’ challenge to a bankrupt husband’s transfers of properties to his wife under a marital settlement agreement. The judgment explained the relevant legal principles regarding an allegation of sham agreement in the context of bankruptcy.

Date of Judgment: 13 October 2026

Coram: Cheung CJ, Ribeiro, Fok and Lam PJJ and Keane NPJ

The Court of Final Appeal clarified the approach to rescission in equity for innocent misrepresentation, and the implications for the plaintiff’s proprietary claims, holding that rescission requires a court order and that ANZ therefore had no proprietary claim against the downstream recipients.

Date of Judgment: 11 September 2026

Date of Reasons for Judgment: 14 October 2026

Coram: Cheung CJ, Ribeiro, Fok and Lam PJJ and Keane NPJ

The Court of Final Appeal dismissed a challenge to a winding-up order based on an alleged prior assignment of the underlying loan debt, holding that the petition rested on a Mainland consent judgment which conclusively established the debt owed to the petitioner. The Court provide further guidance on distinguishing a challenge as to the petitioner’s creditor standing from a challenge to the court’s winding-up jurisdiction.

Date of Judgment: 29 October 2026

Coram: B Fung J

In dismissing the Plaintiff’s application to commit the Defendant for breaching an asset disclosure order ancillary to a Mareva injunction, the Court nevertheless found that the breach was intentional and not merely technical. The Court emphasised that responsibility for compliance was personal: neither negligently failing to read an order nor engaging lawyers to comply on a party’s behalf necessarily relieved that party of responsibility.

At the leave application, the Plaintiff relied on contumelious breach, but at closing submissions, the Plaintiff abandoned that allegation and relied only on negligent breach. Taking into account cumulatively the two-year delay in bringing committal proceedings, the duration of the breach, the protection afforded by the Defendant’s daughter’s undertaking concerning the transferred assets, subsequent compliance with further disclosure orders to the extent identified, and the purpose and utility of committal, the Court concluded that the Defendant should no longer be committed for contempt and dismissed the application.

Date of Decision: 20 October 2026

Date of Reasons: 30 October 2026

Coram: H. Au-Yeung J

The Court granted leave to adduce further evidence from the single joint expert in a water leakage action, notwithstanding that the application was heard only two days before trial. The application arose from a recent falling-concrete incident, following which the Plaintiff promptly sought the Defendants’ consent and applied for expert directions. Although delay alone could justify refusing a late application, refusal was not inevitable. The Court found that the Plaintiff could not be blamed for the timing: the incident had occurred only recently, and the application was heard so close to trial because of the Court’s diary. While the Defendants relied on lateness and prejudice to their trial preparation, the Court allowed the application after balancing all relevant factors to secure the just resolution of the dispute. Importantly, the further report could be accommodated within the trial timetable, leaving the parties time to respond.