NON-NO FASHION WHOLESALE LTD. v. CHUNG KAM WING AND ANOTHER
On the evidence the Court found the questioned signature on the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was not signed by Chung (forensic evidence showed hesitation, retouching and other indicia of forgery; the defence witness Kwan was not credible and his account inconsistent), therefore the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was null and void; consequently Wholesale Limited's claim was dismissed and the counterclaim for possession, declarations of forgery, injunctions, damages, indemnity and account of profits against Wholesale Limited and Kwan succeeded while the claim against Leung failed for insufficient evidence.
- Citation
- NON-NO FASHION WHOLESALE LTD. v. CHUNG KAM WING AND ANOTHER
- Parties
- Plaintiff (original Action) / 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited; Defendant (original Action) and Plaintiff (counterclaim): Chung Kam Wing; Defendant (original Action) and Plaintiff (counterclaim): Shu Man Lee; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): Kwan Sing Kwong; 3rd Defendant (counterclaim): Leung Lai Kuen
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 12 January 2001
- Case Number
- HCA20335/1998
- Procedural Posture
- Civil – Tenancy/possession and Fraud (forgery) / Judgment (reasons for Judgment Delivered)
- Outcome
- Original claim by Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited dismissed; counterclaim by Chung Kam Wing and Shu Man Lee allowed against Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited and Kwan Sing Kwong in part; counterclaim dismissed against Leung Lai Kuen.
- Legal Topics
- Tenancy Agreement Validity, Forgery of Signature, Trespass/mesne Profits, Injunctions, Damages, Account of Profits, Costs on Indemnity Basis
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited
Plaintiff (original Action) / 1st Defendant (counterclaim)
Chung Kam Wing
Defendant (original Action) and Plaintiff (counterclaim)
Shu Man Lee
Defendant (original Action) and Plaintiff (counterclaim)
Kwan Sing Kwong
2nd Defendant (counterclaim)
Leung Lai Kuen
3rd Defendant (counterclaim)
Procedural Posture
Civil – Tenancy/possession and Fraud (forgery) / Judgment (reasons for Judgment Delivered)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was valid and signed by Chung
- 2 Whether the signature on the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was forged
- 3 Whether Wholesale Limited and Kwan committed fraud using the corporate vehicle
Ratio Decidendi
On the evidence the Court found the questioned signature on the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was not signed by Chung (forensic evidence showed hesitation, retouching and other indicia of forgery; the defence witness Kwan was not credible and his account inconsistent), therefore the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was null and void; consequently Wholesale Limited's claim was dismissed and the counterclaim for possession, declarations of forgery, injunctions, damages, indemnity and account of profits against Wholesale Limited and Kwan succeeded while the claim against Leung failed for insufficient evidence.
Court Disposition
Original claim by Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited dismissed; counterclaim by Chung Kam Wing and Shu Man Lee allowed against Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited and Kwan Sing Kwong in part; counterclaim dismissed against Leung Lai Kuen.
Orders
- Claim by Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited (original action) dismissed.
- Judgment for the plaintiffs by counterclaim (Chung Kam Wing and Shu Man Lee) against the 1st defendant by counterclaim (Non-No Fashion Wholesale Limited) for possession of the premises known as Workshop B5 on the Ground Floor of Block B, Hong Kong Industrial Centre, Nos.489-491 Castle Peak Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment