← All Authorities
Hong Kong Leading Case service and gatewaysforum non conveniens

Ever Judger Holding Co Ltd v Kroman Celik Sanayii Anonim Sirketi

(2015) 18 HKCFAR 506
JurisdictionHong Kong
CourtHK Court of Final Appeal
Year2015
StatusBinding authority

Summary

CFA confirmed that service out of jurisdiction requires: serious question to be tried, good arguable case on gateway, and Hong Kong as forum conveniens.

Key Principle

The CFA clarified the principles for service out of the jurisdiction: the court considers whether there is a serious question to be tried, a good arguable case on the relevant gateway, and whether Hong Kong is the forum conveniens.

Area of Law

procedure

Related Cases

Getswift Ltd v Webb (2022) 276 CLR 553

High Court of Australia held there is no power to make a common fund order in favour of litigation funders at the interlocutory stage of a class action.

UBS AG v Tyne (2018) 265 CLR 77

Anshun estoppel bars relitigation where it was unreasonable not to raise the issue in earlier proceedings; re-litigation may also constitute abuse of process.

Palmer v Ayres (2017) 259 CLR 478

High Court of Australia held the reflective loss principle (Prudential Assurance rule) does not apply in Australia, permitting shareholders to recover losses independently of the company.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Ever Judger Holding Co Ltd v Kroman Celik Sanayii Anonim Sirketi and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Ever Judger Holding Co Ltd v K...