CO537-4841 — Page 40

2-

this time the actual individuals who had the custody of the

aircraft were former employees of the companies who had

gone Communist.

24th November, 1949.

Litigation began in Hongkong. Case

No. 1:CHAC v. 15 named individuals who were defectionist

employees. Application for an injunction restraining defendants

from dealing with or disposing of assets and cldning damages

for trespass. Case No. 2.: CATC v. a further number of named

individuals, employees of CATC and also defectionist.

Application

for en injunction as in case No. 1. Case No. 3: National

Resources Commission v. named individuals who were defectionist

employees of this Commission.

and claim for damɛges.

Application for a similar injunction

The Court granted an interim injunction on the same day

on which it was.applied for, 1.e. ex parte. The injunction

operated against the named employees and their servants or agents.

In addition at about this time the Hongkong Government gave

consent under the Hongkong Ordinance on the Representation of

Foreign Powers Control Ordinance to certain persons, Ministers

of the Chinese Nationalist Goverment, to enable them to

litigate in the courts of Hongkong. The consent was given to

one individual who was the Minister of Economic Affairs and

Chairman of the N.R.C., to another individual claiming to be

Menaging Director of CNAC, to a person claiming to be the

Acting President of CATC and to an individual member of the

N.R.C.

25th November.

The defendants to the injunctions in cases 1,

2 and 3 consulted solicitors and counsel in Hongkong and they

came before the court and also obtained a counter-injunction

in similar terms to the interim injunction already granted

restrining any dealing with the planes. As a result, therefore,

in cases Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively there were now two

injunctions, one obtained by the plaintiff and the other by the

defendent.

About 1st December the plaintiff solicitors came to see the

/Attorney

Page 40Page 41