TRILLION WIDE CREDIT FINANCE LTD v. AMPLE SKY HOLDINGS LTD

TRILLION WIDE CREDIT FINANCE LTD v. AMPLE SKY HOLDINGS LTD

The plaintiff proved execution of the two loan agreements, receipt and non‑repayment of the loans; the defendant produced no evidence to rebut; alleged MLO non‑compliances were either inapplicable, not shown to cause prejudice, or did not invalidate the agreements (and the 2nd loan fell outside MLO as a bona fide property purchase loan); the 2nd Loan Agreement evidenced an intention to create an immediate equitable interest and was registrable; accordingly judgment was entered for the plaintiff and the originating summons dismissed.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 3813
Parties
Plaintiff in HCA 288/2019; Defendant in HCMP 2203/2019: Trillion Wide Credit Finance Limited; Defendant in HCA 288/2019; Plaintiff in HCMP 2203/2019: Ample Sky Holdings Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 December 2022
Case Number
HCA288/2019
Procedural Posture
Debt Recovery (hca 288/2019) and Originating Summons Re Registrability (hcmp 2203/2019) / Trial and Judgment (heard Together)
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff in HCA 288/2019; originating summons HCMP 2203/2019 dismissed
Legal Topics
Loan Agreements, Illegality Under Money Lenders Ordinance, Registrability of Security Instrument, Enforcement of Judgment, Interest and Default Interest, Service and Non‑appearance
Source Language
EN
Contract Money Lenders Ordinance Land Law Debt Recovery Mortgages/charges Loan Agreements Illegality Under Money Lenders Ordinance Registrability of Security Instrument +3 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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trillion Wide Credit Finance Limited

Plaintiff in HCA 288/2019; Defendant in HCMP 2203/2019

Ample Sky Holdings Limited

Defendant in HCA 288/2019; Plaintiff in HCMP 2203/2019

Procedural Posture

Debt Recovery (hca 288/2019) and Originating Summons Re Registrability (hcmp 2203/2019) / Trial and Judgment (heard Together)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant executed and received the two loan agreements
  2. 2 Whether a prior mortgage to DBS affected the defendant's liability under the loans
  3. 3 Whether alleged non‑compliances with the Money Lenders Ordinance invalidated or barred enforcement

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff proved execution of the two loan agreements, receipt and non‑repayment of the loans; the defendant produced no evidence to rebut; alleged MLO non‑compliances were either inapplicable, not shown to cause prejudice, or did not invalidate the agreements (and the 2nd loan fell outside MLO as a bona fide property purchase loan); the 2nd Loan Agreement evidenced an intention to create an immediate equitable interest and was registrable; accordingly judgment was entered for the plaintiff and the originating summons dismissed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiff in HCA 288/2019; originating summons HCMP 2203/2019 dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the Plaintiff in HCA 288/2019 for the 1st Loan: principal HK$4,000,000 and interest to 23 December 2022 of HK$10,759,364.38 and thereafter at judgment rate until payment in full
  • Judgment for the Plaintiff in HCA 288/2019 for the 2nd Loan: principal HK$6,350,000 and interest to 23 December 2022 of HK$7,500,393.84 and thereafter at judgment rate until payment in full