PRACTICE DIRECTION - 11.1
EX PARTE, INTERIM AND INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS FOR INJUNCTIONS
PART I - PROCEDURE FOR URGENT APPLICATIONS
General
1. (a) Applications should, save in exceptional circumstances, be made on affidavit to a Judge or the Practice Master.
(b) Enquiries should be made of the Clerk of Court if the application is to be to a Judge. If the application is to the Practice Master, the papers, appropriately marked, should be handed in at the Registry counter.
Urgent applications to a Judge
2. (a) Solicitors who have an urgent application should, as early as possible, contact the Clerk of Court who will direct them to any Judge or Deputy Judge who is free. This applies from Monday to Friday.
(b) If no Judge is free during Court hours, or if there is good reason why the application cannot be made earlier, the Duty Judge will be available at 4.30 p.m.
(c) The Duty Judge will be available in chambers on Saturday from 9 a.m. to 12 noon, when solicitors may approach his clerk direct.
(d) At any other time, the Duty Judge should be approached at home in the usual way.
(e) Solicitors should distinguish between an urgent application, which requires an immediate order, and an application which, because of confidentiality, requires an ex parte hearing but does not necessarily require an immediate order. In the latter case, they should ask the Clerk of Court for an appointment before a Judge in the usual way.
(f) Practitioners are reminded that applications for injunctions which are not so urgent as to require an immediate order, but which for reasons of confidentiality are required to be heard ex parte, should not be made to the Duty Judge. Solicitors should ask the Clerk of Court for an appointment before a Judge in the usual way.
Urgent applications to a Master
3. Solicitors who have an urgent application to a Master should contact the clerk to the Practice Master who will arrange an attendance before the Practice Master or, if he is engaged, any other Master who is available.
PART II - MATERIALS REQUIRED IN APPLICATIONS FOR INJUNCTIONS
General
4. In all applications ex parte for the grant, continuance or discharge of interim or interlocutory injunctions, the papers (including a draft of the order which the Court will be invited to make) should be delivered to the Court sufficiently long before the hearing to enable the Judge to read and digest them all before the hearing.
5. Usually the issue of a writ or originating summons and the swearing of an affidavit in support of an ex parte application for injunction is required before the application is made (O.29, r.1).
6. Where disclosures not contained in the evidence or skeleton argument are made orally during the ex parte hearing, an undertaking to the Court will be required to file and serve a supplemental affidavit setting out these further disclosures.
7. If in very exceptional circumstances precise compliance with this Practice Direction is not possible, the Court will expect an explanation as to why this is so.
Affidavits
8. The affidavit(s) in support of the application should be limited to evidence necessary to give a clear, concise and fair statement of relevant facts.
9. Affidavits should not contain submissions and argument.
10. Exhibits to affidavits should be strictly limited to the issues in the application. No documents should be exhibited which are not of essential importance.
11. The affidavit in support should contain a clear and concise statement :
(a) of the facts giving rise to the claim against the defendant in the proceedings;
(b) of the facts giving rise to the claim for interlocutory relief;
(c) of the facts relied upon as justifying the application ex parte for each part of the order sought; this should include any details of any notice given to the defendant or the reasons
for giving none;
(d) of any answer either asserted by the defendant or which he is likely to assert, either to the claim in the action or to the claim for interlocutory relief;
(e) of any facts known to the applicant which might lead the Court not to grant the relief sought or not to grant it ex parte;
(f) of the precise relief sought.
Skeleton Arguments
12. The application should be accompanied by a skeleton argument setting out precisely and succinctly how it is said that the case : -
(a) meets the requirements for the order sought; and
(b) if applicable, gives rise to the specified exceptional circumstances justifying the grant of a worldwide injunction.
The skeleton argument should identify the precise passages in the evidence relied upon.
13. The skeleton argument lodged with the Court must be served on the opposite party together with the order and evidence.
Orders
14. Applicants for ex parte relief should prepare and lodge with the papers relating to the application a draft minute of the order sought. Such minute should specify the precise relief which the Court is asked to grant. While the undertakings required of an applicant will vary widely from case to case, he will usually be required : -
(a) to give an undertaking in damages;
(b) to notify the defendant of the terms of the order forthwith by appropriate means;
(c) in Mareva injunctions, to pay the reasonable costs and expense incurred in complying with the order by any third party to whom notice of the order is given;
(d) if proceedings have not been issued, to issue them forthwith;
(e) if a draft affidavit has not been sworn, or where the facts have been placed before the Court orally, to procure the swearing of the affidavit or the verification on affidavit of the facts outlined orally to the Court.
15. The order should, as a general rule, contain provision : -
(a) for the defendant to apply on notice for discharge or variation of the order;
(b) for a return date, of an inter partes hearing;
(c) for the costs to be reserved.
16. This Practice Direction consolidates and supersedes the Practice Directions now appearing at pages 12.1, 12.2 and 12.3.
17. This Practice Direction shall take effect on 1 February 1999.
Dated this 31st day of December 1998.
( Andrew Li ) Chief Justice
實務指示 11.1
單方面、中期及非正審
的強制令（或禁制令）申請
第一部 - 迫切申請的程序
一般事項
1. (a) 除特殊情況外，申請須以誓章形式向法官或常規聆案官提出。
(b) 若該申請是向法官提出的，申請人須向法庭書記查詢有關手續；若申請是向常規 聆案官提出的，申請人須前往登記處櫃枱，呈交註有適當標記的文件。
向法官提出的迫切申請
2. (a) 任何律師如需要提出迫切申請，必須盡早聯絡法庭書記，並按法庭書記的指示向 一位有空處理該項申請的法官或暫委法官提出申請，此辦法適用於週一至週五的日
子。
(b) 若在法庭一般聆訊時間內沒有法官能騰空處理上述申請，或是基於某些良好理由 ，申請不能提早作出，則當值法官會在下午4時半處理該申請。
(c) 逢週六上午9時至中午12時，法庭都有當值法官候於內庭，律師可直接與法官的 書記聯絡。
(d) 上文未有提及的其餘時間，律師應按一般做法致電當值法官的居所與他聯絡。
(e) 律師須分辨清楚，迫切申請屬於需要法庭即時頒發命令的申請，是有別於那些不 一定需要法庭即時頒發命令，但為着保密的緣故而需要單方面作出的申請。若是後
者的情況，律師應按一般做法向法庭書記要求約見法官。
(f) 律師應緊記，若強制令（或禁制令）申請並非迫切至需要法庭即時頒發命令，而 只是為保密目的需要進行單方面的聆訊，則申請不應向當值法官作出。律師應按一
般做法向法庭書記要求約見法官。
向聆案官提出的迫切申請
3. 任何律師如需要向聆案官提出迫切申請，應與常規聆案官的書記聯絡，安排約見常規
聆案官；若常規聆案官須處理其他事務，則書記會安排另一位有空的聆案官處理此事。
第二部 - 申請強制令（或禁制令）時所需資料
一般事項
4. 凡單方面向法庭申請批准、延長或撤銷中期或非正審強制令（或禁制令），所有文件
（包括要求法庭頒發的命令的擬稿）都必須在聆訊前盡早送交法庭，以便法官在聆訊前能
審閱和了解文件內容。
5. 一般而言，訴訟人在作出申請前，需先行發出傳訊令狀或原訴傳票，以及就支持單方
面申請強制令的誓章進行宣誓（第29號命令第1條規則）
6. 若訴訟人在單方面聆訊中口頭提及一些未有在證據中或辯論概要中披露的資料，他必
須向法庭作出承諾，以補充誓章述明該等資料，並將誓章呈交法庭存檔及送達訴訟各方。
7. 訴訟人若因極特殊的情況而未能嚴格遵行本實務指示的規定，則應向法庭解釋未能遵
照指示的原因。
誓章
8. 用以支持申請的誓章，內容應限於提供必要的證據，以便清晰、扼要及公正地述明有
關事實。
9. 誓章內容不應載有陳詞及論據。
10. 隨誓章呈堂的證物必須與申請中的爭議點有關，文件若非必需和重要，則不應呈交作
為證物。
11. 用以支持申請的誓章必須清楚扼要地述明：
(a) 向被告人提出申索的事由；
(b) 申索非正審濟助的事由；
(c) 就申請人要求法庭頒發的命令中的每一條款，述明以單方面方式向法庭作出申請
的支持事由；這包括申請人就有關申請而向被告人發出的通知書的詳情（如有的話
），或是沒有給予被告人通知書的原因；
(d) 被告人在答覆書內力稱或可能在答覆書內力稱的說法，不論這些答覆是針對訴訟 中的申索或是針對非正審濟助申索而作出的；
(e) 申請人已知的一些可能會導致法庭不批准濟助（或是不單方面批准濟助）的事實 ；及
(f) 申請人確實申請甚麼濟助。
辯論概要
12. 申請書須連同辯論概要一併呈交，辯論概要須簡潔確切地列明為何申請人認為該案：
(a) 符合法庭頒發申請人所尋求的命令的要求；及
(b) （若適用的話）存在法例中引致指定的特殊情況，因而法庭有理由頒發全球性強制令
（或禁制令）。
辯論概要應指出證據內哪些段落是該項申請的依據。
13. 送交法庭的辯論概要必須連同法庭命令及證據送達給對方。
命令
14. 單方面申請濟助的申請人須備妥一份要求法庭頒發的命令的擬稿，連同與申請有關的
文件送交法庭，該命令擬稿內須具體列明申請人要求法庭批准的濟助。申請人須視乎情況
作出某些承諾，不同案件所要求的承諾可能相差很大。一般來說，申請人須要：
(a) 對損害賠償作出承諾；
(b) 承諾立刻以適當方式通知被告人該項命令的內容；
(c) 在資產凍結令(Mareva injunctions)的申請中，承諾支付收到有關法庭命令的通知書
的第三方為遵行法庭命令而支付的合理訟費及支出；
(d) 若未曾開展訴訟的話，承諾立刻展開訴訟程序；及
(e) 若誓章擬稿未經宣誓，或某項事實是在法庭內口述提供的，承諾就誓章進行宣誓或以
誓章確認訴訟人在法庭口述的事實。
15. 按一般規定，法庭命令應包含一些條文說明下列事項：
(a) 被告人可在接獲通知後，申請撤銷或更改命令；
(b) 進行各方之間的聆訊的日期；及
(c) 法庭暫時不就訟費作出命令。
16. 現有的實務指示第12.1、12.2及12.3頁已合併為本實務指示，並由本實務指示取代。
17. 本實務指示於1999年2月1日生效。
日期：1998年12月31日
終審法院首席法官李國能