AMPLE SKY HOLDINGS LTD v. TRILLION WIDE CREDIT FINANCE LTD

AMPLE SKY HOLDINGS LTD v. TRILLION WIDE CREDIT FINANCE LTD

Evidence proved the defendant's director executed the loan agreements and the loans were advanced and received; the defendant produced no evidence to rebut. Alleged MLO non‑compliances were not shown to cause prejudice and did not bar enforcement; the 2nd Loan Agreement manifested an intention to create an equitable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 3813
Parties
Plaintiff (hca 288/2019); Defendant (hcmp 2203/2019): Trillion Wide Credit Finance Limited; Defendant (hca 288/2019); Plaintiff (hcmp 2203/2019): Ample Sky Holdings Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 December 2022
Case Number
HCMP2203/2019
Procedural Posture
Debt Recovery (loan Agreements) and Originating Summons for Declaration of Non Registrability / Trial and Judgment (defendant Failed to Appear)
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff in HCA 288/2019; originating summons HCMP 2203/2019 dismissed; costs awarded to Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Loan Enforcement, Illegality Under Money Lenders Ordinance, Registrability of Security, Equitable Charge/mortgage, Default Interest
Source Language
en
Contract Property Equity Civil Procedure Regulatory (money Lenders Ordinance) Loan Enforcement Illegality Under Money Lenders Ordinance Registrability of Security +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 7 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trillion Wide Credit Finance Limited

Plaintiff (hca 288/2019); Defendant (hcmp 2203/2019)

Ample Sky Holdings Limited

Defendant (hca 288/2019); Plaintiff (hcmp 2203/2019)

Procedural Posture

Debt Recovery (loan Agreements) and Originating Summons for Declaration of Non Registrability / Trial and Judgment (defendant Failed to Appear)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Loan Agreements were validly executed and loans received
  2. 2 Whether a prior DBS mortgage affected defendant's liability
  3. 3 Whether non‑compliance with the Money Lenders Ordinance invalidated or barred enforcement

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence proved the defendant's director executed the loan agreements and the loans were advanced and received; the defendant produced no evidence to rebut. Alleged MLO non‑compliances were not shown to cause prejudice and did not bar enforcement; the 2nd Loan Agreement manifested an intention to create an equitable security and the defendant failed to prove non‑registrability. Judgment entered for the plaintiff for principals and accrued interest; originating summons dismissed; costs awarded to plaintiff.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Judgment for Plaintiff for 1st Loan principal HK$4000000 and interest up to 23 December 2022 of HK$10759364.38 and thereafter at judgment rate until full payment
  • Judgment for Plaintiff for 2nd Loan principal HK$6350000 and interest up to 23 December 2022 of HK$7500393.84 and thereafter at judgment rate until full payment