AU MAN LEUNG v. AU CHI YUEN AND OTHERS

AU MAN LEUNG v. AU CHI YUEN AND OTHERS

Summary judgment on Part 11 of the RRRASC is refused because the plaintiff's pleadings and affidavit evidence are unsatisfactory and the video/audio materials relied upon do not remove genuine, material factual disputes which can only be resolved at trial by oral evidence and cross-examination; therefore the Amended Summons must be dismissed.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 576
Parties
Plaintiff: Au Man Leung; 1st Defendant: Au Chi Yuen; 2nd Defendant: Au Chi Wai; 3rd Defendant: Yuen Yuen Kwan; 4th Defendant: Chan Suet Fong; 5th Defendant: Hung Oi; 6th Defendant: Poon Yuen Wah; 7th Defendant: Ductile Investment Company Limited; 8th Defendant: Givemefine Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 January 2026
Case Number
HCA83/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Summary Judgment Application (order 14) / Hearing on Amended Summons for Summary Judgment; Decision Refusing Summary Judgment
Outcome
Amended Summons dismissed; summary judgment refused in respect of Part 11 of the RRRASC
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Duress, Undue Influence, False Imprisonment, Constructive Trust, Transfer of Shares, Deed of Gift, Admissions, Video/audio Evidence, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Litigation Equity Trusts Family Law Company Law Tort Law Evidence Summary Judgment +9 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Au Man Leung

Plaintiff

Au Chi Yuen

1st Defendant

Au Chi Wai

2nd Defendant

Yuen Yuen Kwan

3rd Defendant

Chan Suet Fong

4th Defendant

Hung Oi

5th Defendant

Poon Yuen Wah

6th Defendant

Ductile Investment Company Limited

7th Defendant

Givemefine Company Limited

8th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Summary Judgment Application (order 14) / Hearing on Amended Summons for Summary Judgment; Decision Refusing Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Ductile documents and Deed of Gift were executed under duress or undue influence
  2. 2 Whether alleged false imprisonment/physical restraint occurred
  3. 3 Whether video and audio recordings constitute incontrovertible admissions eliminating need for trial

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment on Part 11 of the RRRASC is refused because the plaintiff's pleadings and affidavit evidence are unsatisfactory and the video/audio materials relied upon do not remove genuine, material factual disputes which can only be resolved at trial by oral evidence and cross-examination; therefore the Amended Summons must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Amended Summons dismissed; summary judgment refused in respect of Part 11 of the RRRASC

Orders

  • Amended Summons dismissed
  • No summary judgment granted on Part 11 of the RRRASC