Gracewood International Limited v Zhan

[2025] NZHC 2989

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2025-404-002413

[2025] NZHC 2989

UNDER

the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934

IN THE MATTER OF

a judgment of the High Court of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

BETWEEN

GRACEWOOD INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

Judgment Creditor

AND

XIANGMING ZHAN

Judgment Debtor

On the papers
Counsel:	G J Angus and N K Ryan for Judgment Creditor
Judgment:	9 October 2025

JUDGMENT OF VAN BOHEMEN J

This judgment was delivered by me on 9 October 2025 at 12:30 pm Pursuant to Rule 11.5 High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date……………………………..

Solicitors:
Morris Legal, Auckland

GRACEWOOD INTERNATIONAL LTD v ZHAN [2025] NZHC 2989 [9 October 2025]

[1]                 The applicant, Gracewood International Limited, applies without notice for the registration of a foreign judgment under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934 (the Act).

[2]                 The applicant has filed an affidavit of Leung Eviana Bon Yuen, a partner at the firm acting for the applicant, in support of its application.

Background

[3]                 The applicant is a company incorporated in Hong Kong, which is involved in the distribution of petroleum products in the oil and gas industry. Mr Zhan is a legal representative of Guangdong Xingqiu Group Co Ltd, which is a trader of liquified petroleum gas in South China. He was also previously the president and majority shareholder.

[4]                 After discovering Mr Zhan to be in New Zealand, the applicant commenced proceedings against Mr Zhan in February 2023, seeking a freezing order, which was granted.

[5]                 On 7 April 2025, in the judgment HCA 335/2022 of the High Court of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of First Instance, Master Dick Ho ordered a final judgment in respect of funds of US$16,626,816.86 owed by Mr Zhan to the applicant (the Foreign Judgment).

[6]                 On 13 May 2025, Mr Zhan issued an appeal against the Foreign Judgment, which was filed out of time. This appeal was subsequently struck out.

[7]The applicant seeks to register the Foreign Judgment in New Zealand.

Registration of foreign judgments

[8]                 The Act applies to decisions of the courts of Hong Kong, where the judgment is final and conclusive as between the parties and there is a sum payable.1

1      Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgment Act 1934, s 3(3); and Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments (Hong Kong) Order 1957 (SR 1957/263).

[9]                 A judgment creditor may apply to the Court within six years after the date of the judgment to have the judgment registered. The Court must, subject to proof of the prescribed matters and to the provisions of the Act, order the judgment be registered. The judgment must not be registered if it has been wholly satisfied or it could not be enforced in the country of the original court.2

[10]             Part 23 of the High Court Rules 2016 applies to enforcement of judgments under the Act. An application for registration of a foreign judgment may be made without notice to the judgment debtor.3 An application must be supported by one or more affidavits.4 The foreign judgment must be attached as an exhibit to an affidavit filed in support of the application.5 Judicial notice must be taken of any seal or signature by which a copy of a foreign judgment is verified and which purports to be the seal of the court.6 The affidavit must include the rate of interest carried by the judgment by the law of the country under which it is given7 and the amount of interest that, by that law, will become due under the judgment up to the time of the application.8

[11]The affidavit filed in support of an application for registration must state:9

(a)that the applicant is entitled to enforce the judgment;

(b)that the judgment has not been wholly or partially satisfied;

(c)that the judgment can be enforced in the country of the original court;

(d)that if the judgment were registered, it would not be liable to be set aside under s 6 of the Act; and

(e)the full name, title, trade or business, and the usual or last known place of abode of the judgment creditor and the judgment debtor respectively.

2      Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934, s 4(1).

3      High Court Rules 2016, r 23.4(2).

4      Rule 23.7.

5      Rule 23.8.

6      Rule 23.9.

7      Rule 23.10(b).

8      Rule 23.10(c)(ii).

9      Rule 23.11(1).

[12]             The deponent of the affidavit must also specify the source of the person’s information and the grounds for their belief.10

Are the procedural requirements for registration of the foreign judgment met?

[13]             The affidavit of Ms Leung attaches, among other things, the Foreign Judgment, which is stamped with the seal of the High Court of Hong Kong.

[14]             The application indicates that the applicant wishes the Foreign Judgment to be registered in the United States dollar. The affidavit of Ms Leung includes the rate of interest under the law of Hong Kong and the amount of interest payable up to the time of the application.

[15]             The affidavit of Ms Leung states, to the best of Ms Leung’s information and belief, the matters specified under r 23.11(1). Ms Leung also specifies the source of her information and the grounds of her belief as required by r 23.11(2).

[16]             I am satisfied the prescribed requirements for the registration of the Foreign Judgment are met.

Result

[17]The application is granted.

Orders

[18]I make the following orders:

(a)The Foreign Judgment be registered pursuant to s 4(1) of the Act.

(b)Service of the Notice is to be effected on Mr Zhan by emailing the Notice to his email addresses.

(c)Service is deemed to be effected on the applicant taking the step set out at [17](b).

10     Rule 23.11(2).

(d)Costs are reserved.

G J van Bohemen J