Hu v Ho [2009] NSWDC 310

Hu v Ho [2009] NSWDC 310

The plaintiff was entitled to judgment against Kathy Ho for advances of $300,000 and $400,000 and interest due to conclusive evidence of guarantee and non-repayment, and judgment against Alphena Pty Limited for $300,000 and interest based on unchallenged receipt and lack of lawful justification for retention, with no credible evidence of alternative arrangements as suggested by the defendants.

Parties
Plaintiff: Helena Hu (AKAS) Huiying Hu; First Defendant: Kathy Ho; Second Defendant: Sun Sun Chua; Third Defendant: Alphena Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ex Tempore Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff against first and third defendants; costs awarded to plaintiff against both defendants (ordinary basis against first defendant, indemnity basis against third defendant). Proceedings against second defendant not pursued.
Legal Topics
Identity of Borrower, Guarantees, Restitution, Indemnity Costs
Loan Transactions Civil Procedure Identity of Borrower Guarantees Restitution Indemnity Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Helena Hu (AKAS) Huiying Hu

Plaintiff

Kathy Ho

First Defendant

Sun Sun Chua

Second Defendant

Alphena Pty Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ex Tempore Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether advances made by the plaintiff were guaranteed by Kathy Ho
  2. 2 Whether Alphena Pty Limited received and retained funds from the plaintiff without lawful justification
  3. 3 Whether the funds advanced to Alphena were for the benefit of Mr King or otherwise

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was entitled to judgment against Kathy Ho for advances of $300,000 and $400,000 and interest due to conclusive evidence of guarantee and non-repayment, and judgment against Alphena Pty Limited for $300,000 and interest based on unchallenged receipt and lack of lawful justification for retention, with no credible evidence of alternative arrangements as suggested by the defendants.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff against first and third defendants; costs awarded to plaintiff against both defendants (ordinary basis against first defendant, indemnity basis against third defendant). Proceedings against second defendant not pursued.

Orders

  • Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against Kathy Ho in the sum of $928,327.62 (principal sums $300,000 and $400,000, and interest, less $20,000 in interest already paid, making $228,327.62).
  • Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against Alphena Pty Limited in the sum of $419,176.62 (money had $300,000 and interest of $119,176.62).