Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Aggravated damages

Legal area

Court

8 May 2026

ZHANG XIANGHUI v. AMAX AND ASSOCIATES LTD

Citation

[2026] HKDC 748
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5624/2023

The defendant was liable for defamation for publishing the Statements; the Statements bore the natural and ordinary meanings set out by the court; on quantum general damages of HK$200,000 were appropriate having regard to limited circulation and lack of aggravating evidence; aggravated damages were refused for lack of evidence of increased injury and absence of plaintiff testimony; an injunction was granted; costs and pre-judgment interest were awarded to the plaintiff.
7 Jan 2026

PET LAND AND ANOTHER v. CHOW PO CHU AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKDC 56
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4216/2022

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the 2nd Defendant alone published the impugned material; the statements (post and Comments 1-3) were defamatory; the 2nd Defendant knew the veterinary diagnosis and causation were uncertain and nonetheless published assertions of fact that bathing caused aspiration pneumonia, thereby demonstrating malice which defeats qualified privilege and renders malicious falsehood established; fair comment similarly fails where statements were not based on true or privileged facts; Comment 4 was not published with malice and was privileged; consequenti…
28 Oct 2025

徐立斌及另一人對鍾灼偉

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1817
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1218/2024

On the totality of the evidence (defendant's aggressive messages threatening debt collectors, timing of LinkedIn visits and letters, contemporaneous third‑party communications, the defendant's revised defence containing similar allegations, inconsistencies in defendant's account and his demonstrated motive), the court concluded the defendant instructed others to send the threatening letters; injunction was warranted; plaintiffs proved psychiatric injury and recoverable special, aggravated and exemplary damages; defendant liable even if letters were sent by others at his direction.
11 Nov 2024

TSANG CHI ON v. YAU CHI LOK

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1874
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1752/2022

Liability having been entered in default, the court assessed and awarded damages totaling HK$446,130 (PSLA HK$200,000; aggravated damages HK$100,000; loss of allowance HK$140,130; other special damages HK$6,000), awarded interest as stated and ordered costs to follow the event with an order nisi for costs to be taxed if not agreed.
20 Jun 2024

CHAN YUK PING v. LIEW SHUK FUI

Citation

[2024] HKDC 999
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1811/2022

Liability having been established by interlocutory judgment, the court awarded compensatory general/aggravated damages of HK$600,000 and special damages for medical expenses of HK$2,000 (total HK$602,000), refused exemplary damages because compensatory award and prior contempt punishment were sufficient and the case did not fall within Rookes categories or justify additional punishment, rejected all other special damages for lack of evidence, and awarded pre-judgment interest at 1% above HSBC prime from date of writ with post-judgment interest at judgment rate; costs nisi to plaintiff.
18 Apr 2023

CHAN SHUNG FAI v. CHAN KAM WAH

Citation

[2023] HKDC 499
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3441/2020

Court held separate assessments were appropriate given differences in medium, content and extent; the defendant's belated apology was disregarded as tactical and not mitigating; defendant was actuated by malice (aimed at damaging plaintiff's election prospects); damages awarded for each publication based on gravity and extent with aggravated damages awarded for conduct and refusal to apologise.
10 Feb 2023

KARTIKA PUSPITASARI 對戴志偉及另一人

Citation

[2023] HKDC 226
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1891/2016

Liability was treated as established based on prior criminal findings and absence of defence; the court accepted the medical and psychiatric expert reports and the plaintiff's evidence as reliable; having compared authorities and adjusted for inflation and evidential gaps the court fixed quantum by awarding specified sums for general, aggravated and special heads, deducted an identified set-off of HK$350,000 and ordered interest and costs accordingly.
31 Jan 2023

梁瑞成對黃根達及另一人

Citation

[2023] HKCA 92
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP226/2022

Leave to appeal was refused because the defendants failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success: the trial judge's factual findings on credibility, causation and quantum were supported by evidence including police testimony and medical expert reports; defendants produced no contrary expert or valuation evidence and surveillance footage was insufficient to overturn the judge's findings.
26 Oct 2022

LAW CHI MAN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1231
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI2945/2018

The court preferred the police witnesses' evidence and found the Manoeuvre and handcuffing were reasonably necessary and proportionate in the rapidly evolving circumstances; accordingly the defendant established lawful justification for the force and the plaintiff's claims in battery and negligence were dismissed and no damages awarded.
21 Jun 2022

梁瑞成對黃根達及另一人

Citation

[2022] HKDC 569
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI110/2018

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the applicants failed to show any substantial or reasonable prospect of success or any other reason in the interests of justice; the trial judge's factual findings on property loss and aggravated conduct were supported by the evidence and not shown to be erroneous.