TANG PING KONG v. CHOW CHI LIT SIMON

TANG PING KONG v. CHOW CHI LIT SIMON

The defendant failed to plead or establish any triable defence to the claim on the cheques and loans; the late affirmation was excluded for lack of formal application, prejudice to the plaintiff and because it disclosed matters not pleaded; therefore summary judgment for the plaintiff was properly entered for $120,000 plus interest and costs.

Citation
TANG PING KONG v. CHOW CHI LIT SIMON
Parties
Plaintiff: Tang Ping Kong; Defendant: Chow Chi Lit Simon
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 March 2005
Case Number
DCCJ4660/2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Debt Summary Judgment / Appeal From Registrar's Summary Judgment (hearing in Chambers)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment for plaintiff entered
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Dishonoured Cheques, Loans, Usury/illegality, Admissibility of Late Evidence
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Negotiable Instruments Debt Recovery Summary Judgment Dishonoured Cheques Loans Usury/illegality +1 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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tang Ping Kong

Plaintiff

Chow Chi Lit Simon

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Debt Summary Judgment / Appeal From Registrar's Summary Judgment (hearing in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant raised a triable defence to the claim on 3 post-dated cheques and 4 loans totaling $120,000
  2. 2 Whether the late-filed affirmation could be admitted as fresh evidence
  3. 3 Whether allegations of illegality/usury were properly pleaded and supported

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant failed to plead or establish any triable defence to the claim on the cheques and loans; the late affirmation was excluded for lack of formal application, prejudice to the plaintiff and because it disclosed matters not pleaded; therefore summary judgment for the plaintiff was properly entered for $120,000 plus interest and costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment for plaintiff entered

Orders

  • Judgment for Plaintiff for $120,000.00
  • Interest at 8.069% per annum from 3.9.2004 to 14.2.2005 and thereafter at judgment rate until payment