Lord Sales, Deputy President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, delivered the latest lecture in the HKU-Temple Chambers Law Lecture Series on 24 September 2026.

The Role of Equity in the Law of Contract

”, the lecture addressed the distinct moral foundations of contract law and Equity, and how the two interact. The opening remarks were delivered by Professor Hualing Fu, Dean of the HKU Faculty of Law, and 

Held at the University of Hong Kong, the event welcomed nearly 300 attendees including members of the judiciary, legal practitioners, professors, and law students. The Honourable Mr Justice Eugene Fung, Judge of the Court of First Instance of the High Court and a former member of Temple Chambers, moderated the lecture.

We extend our sincere thanks to our co-sponsor, The University of Hong Kong, to Lord Sales and our other speakers for their contributions, and to everyone who attended and supported the event.

Securities and Futures Commission v Lo Kai Bong & Ors

 [2026] HKCFI 5211, the Court of First Instance continued worldwide Mareva and 

 injunctions against Mr Lo Kai Bong and his corporate vehicle Major Success Group Limited, in the context of a s.214 SFO petition in respect of a prominent casino operator, LET Group (formerly known as Suncity Group).

The SFC’s s.214 petition concerns Mr Lo’s alleged disregard of regulatory requirements in procuring a proposed disposal by two listed companies. DHCJ Gary CC Lam was satisfied that a real risk of dissipation existed, relying in particular on a series of purported restructuring transactions by which key assets were transferred out of the companies and into Major Success for Mr Lo’s personal benefit, purportedly to secure his personal debts to third party lenders.

Of wider significance, the Court conducted a detailed review of the Hong Kong and English authorities on whether public and/or regulatory authorities should be required to give cross-undertakings in damages when applying for injunctions. The Court held that dispensing with a cross-undertaking from the SFC was justified, bearing in mind the real risk that exposure to potentially significant compensation claims could inhibit the SFC’s enforcement functions. While it was appropriate for a regulator like the SFC to be liable for costs in the usual way in order to protect innocent parties from unjustified enforcement action, it would be going too far to require the SFC to give a cross-undertaking as to damages. The Court therefore declined to depart from previous Hong Kong authorities which held that the SFC need not give any cross-undertaking, and distinguished recent English authorities which appeared to have moved in a different direction.

 acted for the Securities and Futures Commission.

 also acted for the Securities and Futures Commission, in preparing written submissions for the earlier 

Members

Recruitment

Latest News

High Court confirms that SFC not required to give cross-undertaking for injunctions

Recent Judgments

Latest Events

Lord Sales delivers the 2026 HKU-Temple Chambers Law Lecture

PRACTICE AREAS

About

Members

Recruitment

What's New