Thursday, his Honour Judge Skinner Turner gave his decision in the application, made on behalf of the Peking Government for an injunction restraining the Hongkong & Shanghai Bank from parting with any monies now in their possession and standing in the name of Dr. Wu Ting-fang, and being part of the Government funds of the Republic of China, until after judgement in am action commenced in the Shanghai City Court by the plaintiffs against Dr. Wu.
Mr, H. Lipson Ward appeared for the applicant (Chang Shih-chao) and Mr. D. MeNeill for the Hongkong & Shanghai Bank.
His Lordship said: This is a proceeding similar in nature to that considered by me last year in a matter entitled chang Shih-chia vy. Hongkong & Shanghai Bank: in which I went into the_ principles that should guide this Court in an application for an injunction such as is asked here. I have gone through my former judgement, and I have again carefully considered Mr. MeNeill's arguments and the authorities. I see no reason to alter the view I expressed on the former occasion, and I really" see no substantial difference in the facts between then and now. There is a fund, there is a dispute as to its ownership: there is an action on this very matter in a Court which is exercising jurisdiction (I am going on the evidence before me in this matter): and the defendants claim no interest in the fund which is alleged to be under the control of ona man and not necessarily in his official capacity. These to my mind constitute sufficient grounds on which the order asked for should be made.
Dirricuttigs or JURISDICTION.
I have gone over Besson's case again: I note that the reference to it in the last edition of Hart's Banking Law quotes Kay L. J. as dealing with an order restraining the Bank from honouring drafts "already" drawn. But I think I did not pay sufficient attention last year to a point mentioned by me this time and emphasized by Mr. Macleod: I mean that of jurisdiction. It seems to me that in a country like China, where it is impossible to get all the parties to a dispute like this before one Court, it is the more essential to be able to make orders such as the one prayed for to assist the due administration of justice. In_England, as the author of Hart's Banking Law points out (p. 339) notice to the banker of an injunction restraining his customer from drawing on a fund would compel the Bank to dishonour any cheque drawn in disregard of the injunction: here no such condition can apply. It has never been suggested that notice to a British Bank of an injunction granted against its customer by any other than a British Court would affect that bank and prevent it from honouring that customer's draft. And under those circumstances it seems to me
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.