In [2026] HKCFI 1250, the receivers appointed by the BVI court (Receivers) over a BVI company (SIL) applied to the Hong Kong Court for recognition and assistance and sought, 

, orders against former solicitors of SIL (HSFK) for delivery up of documents. The recognition application was opposed on the ground, 

, that the purpose of the receivership has fallen away. The delivery up application (brought concurrently by both SIL and the Receivers) was opposed on the ground, 

, that the Receivers lacked standing, and the issues as to the ownership of the relevant documents sought to be produced fell within the scope of an arbitration agreement between SIL and HSFK.

Noting that there appears to be no Hong Kong cases on the approach to be adopted in an application for recognition of foreign receivers for preservation of assets, the Court examined cases in other common law jurisdictions and adopted a two-stage test: (i) the first stage is to consider whether there is a sufficient connection between the defendant and the jurisdiction in which the foreign receiver was appointed; and (ii) the second stage is to decide whether the Court should exercise its discretion to recognise and assist the foreign receivers.

As to the delivery up application, the Court confirmed that as a matter of principle (i) clients are not entitled to delivery up of documents which are owned by solicitors; (ii) the Court does not have supervisory jurisdiction to order solicitors to produce to the client documents owned by the former; and (iii) the issue of ownership of such documents is an arbitrable matter and not excluded by reason of public policy.

On the facts, the Court (i) refused to recognise the foreign receivership on the ground that the purpose of the receivership had been spent and the order appointing the Receivers had expired; (ii) dismissed the Receivers’ application for delivery up on the ground that they lacked standing, (iii) granted a permanent stay of SIL’s delivery up application in favour of arbitration; and (iv) held that it would also have granted a case-management stay of the Receivers’ application for delivery up, as it would be tantamount to allowing SIL to circumvent the arbitration agreement with HSFK.

, instructed by and acted for Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer.

, instructed by Howse Williams, acted for the Intervener.

Members

Recruitment

Latest News

BVI Court-appointed receivers refused recognition by the Hong Kong Court

Recent Judgments

PRACTICE AREAS

About

Members

Recruitment

What's New