NGAI LEUNG TOMMY v. SUNG NGAI YEUNG AND ANOTHER

NGAI LEUNG TOMMY v. SUNG NGAI YEUNG AND ANOTHER

The court accepted P's uncontradicted evidence that he accepted the assignment of the D1 loan at a monthly interest rate of 4.5% and found that D1 had failed to repay the loan, establishing D1's indebtedness to P at the accepted rate; other factual defenses (e.g. inability to effect sale of property) did not displace P's claim on the balance of probabilities.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 983
Parties
Plaintiff: P; Defendant: D1; Defendant: D2; Assignor: Cousin Wong; Purchaser: Wide View; Guarantor: Wang; Third Party: P's father
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 April 2019
Case Number
HCA35/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Debt Recovery (loan) / Judgment on Liability and Interest Rate
Outcome
Court accepted plaintiff's evidence on interest and liability and found defendant D1 indebted to plaintiff; remaining factual disputes were not sufficient to defeat the claim on the balance of probabilities.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Debt, Interest Rate, Guarantee, Power of Attorney, Sale and Purchase Agreement, Repayment
Source Language
EN
Contract Property Debt Recovery Guarantee Evidence Assignment of Debt Interest Rate Power of Attorney +2 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P

Plaintiff

D1

Defendant

D2

Defendant

Cousin Wong

Assignor

Wide View

Purchaser

Wang

Guarantor

P's father

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Debt Recovery (loan) / Judgment on Liability and Interest Rate

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the loan assigned to P attracted a monthly interest rate of 4.5%
  2. 2 Whether D1 has failed to repay the loan to P
  3. 3 Whether D2 is liable as guarantor for the loan

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted P's uncontradicted evidence that he accepted the assignment of the D1 loan at a monthly interest rate of 4.5% and found that D1 had failed to repay the loan, establishing D1's indebtedness to P at the accepted rate; other factual defenses (e.g. inability to effect sale of property) did not displace P's claim on the balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Court accepted plaintiff's evidence on interest and liability and found defendant D1 indebted to plaintiff; remaining factual disputes were not sufficient to defeat the claim on the balance of probabilities.

Orders

  • Declaration that D1 owes P RMB 4500000 with interest at 4.5% per month from the relevant date of the loan