1964_RULES_OF_THE_SUPREME_COURT — Page 22

A 22

[Subsidiary]

2363/90

CAP. 41 The Rules of the Supreme Court Order 11 [1988 Ed.

(2) Rule 1(1), (2), (3) and (4) shall apply, with any necessary modifications, in relation to a notice of an originating motion and a petition as they apply in relation to a writ.

ORDER 11

SERVICE OF PROCESS, ETC., OUT OF THE JURISDICTION

Principal cases in which service of writ out of jurisdiction is permissible

(0. 11, r. 1)

1.

(1) Provided that the writ does not contain any claim-as is mentioned in Order 75, rule--2(1) and is not a writ to which paragraph (2) of this rule applies, service of a writ out of the jurisdiction is permissible with the leave of the Court if in the action begun by the writ-

(a) relief is sought against a person domiciled or ordinarily

resident within the jurisdiction;

(b) an injunction is sought ordering the defendant to do or refrain from doing anything within the jurisdiction (whether or not damages are also claimed in respect of a failure to do or the doing of that thing);

(c) the claim is brought against a person duly served within or out of the jurisdiction and a person out of the jurisdiction is a necessary or proper party thereto;

(d) the claim is brought to enforce, rescind, dissolve, annul or otherwise affect a contract, or to recover damages or obtain other relief in respect of the breach of a contract, being (in either case) a contract which-

(i) was made within the jurisdiction, or

(ii) was made by or through an agent trading or resid- ing within the jurisdiction on behalf of a principal trading or residing out of the jurisdiction, or

(iii) is by its terms, or by implication, governed by Hong Kong law, or

(iv) contains a term to the effect that the High Court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any action in respect of the contract;

(e) the claim is brought in respect of a breach committed

within the jurisdiction of a contract made within or out of the jurisdiction, and irrespective of the fact, if such be the case, that the breach was preceded or accompanied by a breach committed out of the jurisdiction that rendered impossible the performance of so much of the contract as ought to have been performed within the jurisdiction; (f) the claim is founded on a tort and the damage was sustained, or resulted from an act committed, within the jurisdiction;