KING MOUNTAIN INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER v. TANG YUK LING DOBE AND ANOTHER

KING MOUNTAIN INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER v. TANG YUK LING DOBE AND ANOTHER

Leave to appeal dismissed because the 2nd Defendant has an arguable defence that there was no total failure of consideration and there are material disputed facts about the illegality and legal effectiveness of the Agreements which make the matter unsuitable for summary determination, so the plaintiffs lack a reasonable prospect of success on appeal.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 1720
Parties
1st Plaintiff: KING MOUNTAIN INVESTMENTS LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: HUANG XUBIN （黃旭斌）; 1st Defendant: TANG YUK LING DOBE (鄧玉玲); 2nd Defendant: DONE WELL LIMITED (都百有限公司)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 June 2024
Case Number
HCA257/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Restitution / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Order (summary Judgment Stage)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Failure of Consideration, Summary Judgment, Leave to Appeal, Ineffective/illegal Contracts, Arguable Defence
Source Language
EN
Restitution Contract Civil Procedure Illegality Failure of Consideration Summary Judgment Leave to Appeal Ineffective/illegal Contracts +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KING MOUNTAIN INVESTMENTS LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

HUANG XUBIN （黃旭斌）

2nd Plaintiff

TANG YUK LING DOBE (鄧玉玲)

1st Defendant

DONE WELL LIMITED (都百有限公司)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Restitution / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Order (summary Judgment Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd Defendant has a real/bona fide defence that there was not a total failure of consideration
  2. 2 Whether restitution is available for legally ineffective contracts irrespective of counterperformance
  3. 3 Whether the Agreements were illegal/unenforceable and if that equates to being void ab initio

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal dismissed because the 2nd Defendant has an arguable defence that there was no total failure of consideration and there are material disputed facts about the illegality and legal effectiveness of the Agreements which make the matter unsuitable for summary determination, so the plaintiffs lack a reasonable prospect of success on appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Costs order nisi in favour of the 2nd Defendant to be assessed summarily on the papers.
  • Directions: 2nd Defendant to lodge and serve a statement of costs within 5 days, limited to two pages in bullet point form; Plaintiffs to lodge and serve their list of objections, if any, within 5 days thereafter, limited to two pages in bullet point form; 2nd Defendant has leave to lodge and serve a reply within 3...