21 FINANCE LTD v. GOLDEN HORSE ASIA PACIFIC LTD AND ANOTHER

21 FINANCE LTD v. GOLDEN HORSE ASIA PACIFIC LTD AND ANOTHER

The court found the Defendants' assertion of an agreement or promise to withdraw proceedings was not believable on the evidence presented (no particulars, communications did not convey such agreement, no follow up conduct), and the Defendants failed to show reasonable reliance or alteration of position induced by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 1600
Parties
Applicant: 21 Finance Limited; 1st Defendant (hcmp 507/2022): Gan Lei; 2nd Defendant (hcmp 507/2022): Tu Bin; 1st Defendant (hcmp 1231/2022): Golden Horse Asia Pacific Limited; 2nd Defendant (hcmp 1231/2022): Gan Kelu
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 June 2023
Case Number
HCMP1231/2022
Procedural Posture
Mortgage Enforcement by Originating Summons / Hearing and Summary Determination Under RHC O.28 R.4 (summary Disposal)
Outcome
Judgment entered for Applicant (21 Finance Limited) in HCMP 507/2022 and HCMP 1231/2022; proceedings summarily disposed for lack of triable issues.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Mortgage Enforcement, Promissory Estoppel, Oral Agreement to Withdraw Proceedings, Conversion to Writ
Source Language
en
Property Law Contract Equity Civil Procedure Mortgage Law Summary Judgment Mortgage Enforcement Promissory Estoppel +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

21 Finance Limited

Applicant

Gan Lei

1st Defendant (hcmp 507/2022)

Tu Bin

2nd Defendant (hcmp 507/2022)

Golden Horse Asia Pacific Limited

1st Defendant (hcmp 1231/2022)

Gan Kelu

2nd Defendant (hcmp 1231/2022)

Procedural Posture

Mortgage Enforcement by Originating Summons / Hearing and Summary Determination Under RHC O.28 R.4 (summary Disposal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an agreement by the plaintiff to withdraw proceedings to permit private sale of the mortgaged properties (Agreement Issue)
  2. 2 Whether promissory estoppel arises from alleged promise not to enforce rights (Estoppel Issue)
  3. 3 Whether there are triable issues requiring conversion to writ actions or whether summary judgment is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the Defendants' assertion of an agreement or promise to withdraw proceedings was not believable on the evidence presented (no particulars, communications did not convey such agreement, no follow up conduct), and the Defendants failed to show reasonable reliance or alteration of position induced by any promise; accordingly there were no triable issues and summary judgment was entered for the plaintiff in both matters with specified textual and interest rate corrections and preserved liberty to apply for further relief including sale.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for Applicant (21 Finance Limited) in HCMP 507/2022 and HCMP 1231/2022; proceedings summarily disposed for lack of triable issues.

Orders

  • Judgment be entered for the Plaintiff in both proceedings in terms as sought in the Notices of Appointment to Hear Originating Summons, with certain textual deletions describing loans and interest as secured by the relevant mortgages
  • Interest rate in paragraphs 1(ii) and 1(iii) in HCMP 1231/2022 corrected from 27% to 15%