CHIU RICKY TONG v. EAGLE BRIGHT PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS

CHIU RICKY TONG v. EAGLE BRIGHT PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS

Eagle Bright's appeal was dismissed because, following its striking off and dissolution, it lacked capacity to continue the appeal and no explanation supported continuation; the Laws failed to raise a credible, particularised defence to repayment of the $5.9m principal (their denial of the Disputed Verbal Agreement was not believable and they did not identify an alternative transaction), and s.25 MLO did not establish a triable issue that would render the principal irrecoverable, therefore summary judgment/interim payment was properly granted and the Laws' appeal was dismissed; costs ordered nisi.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 872
Parties
Plaintiff: CHIU RICKY TONG; 1st Defendant: EAGLE BRIGHT PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: LAW WAI HUNG; 3rd Defendant: LAW SHING YAN
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 April 2022
Case Number
HCA520/2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under O.58 R.1 (rehearing of Summary Judgment/interim Payment Application) / Appeal Determined on Paper (rehearing of Summons for Summary Judgment/interim Payment)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed (1st Defendant Eagle Bright dismissed for lack of capacity due to dissolution; 2nd and 3rd Defendants' appeal dismissed on merits)
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Interim Payment, Sham Transactions, Extortionate Loans (s.25 Mlo), Company Striking Off and Bona Vacantia, Guarantee/indemnity, Change of Position, Counterclaim
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Law Company Law Money Lenders Ordinance Restitution/unjust Enrichment Summary Judgment Interim Payment Sham Transactions +5 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHIU RICKY TONG

Plaintiff

EAGLE BRIGHT PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED

1st Defendant

LAW WAI HUNG

2nd Defendant

LAW SHING YAN

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under O.58 R.1 (rehearing of Summary Judgment/interim Payment Application) / Appeal Determined on Paper (rehearing of Summons for Summary Judgment/interim Payment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Disputed Verbal Agreement existed and was enforceable
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment / interim payment for $5,900,000 should have been granted
  3. 3 Whether s.25 Money Lenders Ordinance could defeat recovery of principal

Ratio Decidendi

Eagle Bright's appeal was dismissed because, following its striking off and dissolution, it lacked capacity to continue the appeal and no explanation supported continuation; the Laws failed to raise a credible, particularised defence to repayment of the $5.9m principal (their denial of the Disputed Verbal Agreement was not believable and they did not identify an alternative transaction), and s.25 MLO did not establish a triable issue that would render the principal irrecoverable, therefore summary judgment/interim payment was properly granted and the Laws' appeal was dismissed; costs ordered nisi.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed (1st Defendant Eagle Bright dismissed for lack of capacity due to dissolution; 2nd and 3rd Defendants' appeal dismissed on merits)

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Judgment/Order for payment of HKD 5,900,000 upheld against the Defendants