Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Appeal on findings of fact

Legal area

Court

18 Dec 2025

SIAO MIU HUA SUED BY MA SIU YEE JOANNA HER NEXT FRIEND v. WU CHING KUEN THE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF MA CHIU HOI SANFORD, DECEASED

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1130
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV57/2024

A prima facie case of the Estate's impecuniosity was established by the Plaintiff, the Defendant offered no opposing evidence or submissions, and the appeal is principally against findings of fact (a heavy burden), so no sufficient countervailing factor existed; it was just to order security for costs of the appeal in the sum of HK$500,000 to be paid into court within 21 days, and to grant the Amendment Summons and related orders with costs in the cause.
5 Sept 2025

CHAN CHUNG MAN 對 CHAN KEONG

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4152
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA20/2025

Leave to appeal was refused because the tribunal judge fulfilled the statutory duty to investigate by considering the dashcam and other relevant evidence, made permissible factual and credibility findings supported by the record (including a criminal conviction), and the appellant showed no legal error or injustice warranting appellate interference with factual determinations or discretionary costs decisions.
14 Jul 2023

AMJAD-UL-MAHMOOD v. PROFIT HILL INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKDC 940
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI534/2017

Leave to appeal was refused because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success or any other interest of justice; he did not identify any palpable errors or show the trial judge's factual findings were plainly wrong, and the absence of CCTV footage and the trial court's evaluation of medical evidence provided no basis for appellate intervention.
19 Jun 2020

鍾鼎禮對鄧玉蘭

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1306
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA44/2019

Leave to appeal was refused because the appellant's grounds challenged factual findings that were supported by evidence and affirmed by the tribunal, the appellant produced no evidence to support the claimed additional HK$12,500 deposit, and the application to adduce fresh evidence (letting agent) at the leave stage violated the principle of finality and the limits on receiving further evidence under the rules; no special circumstances existed to permit appellate interference.
12 Apr 2016

ALLIED SUCCESS CREATION LTD v. CHEUNG HON KUEN also known as MICHAEL CHEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

ALLIED SUCCESS CREATION LTD v. CHEUNG HON KUEN also known as MICHAEL CHEUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV81/2015

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's factual findings that the 1st, 2nd and 4th defendants concealed their relationship with the 5th defendant, engineered the pre‑lease and sale to secure secret profit and thereby breached fiduciary duties and committed misrepresentation/dishonest assistance; the appellate court held the judge was not plainly wrong, the isolated factual date error was immaterial, and delay did not justify overturning objective credibility‑supported findings; appeals dismissed.
30 Jun 2014

JOTRON AS (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JOTRON ELECTRONICS AS) v. STANLEY CHANG t/a HONG KONG INSTECH TRADING CO.

Citation

JOTRON AS (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JOTRON ELECTRONICS AS) v. STANLEY CHANG t/a HONG KONG INSTECH TRADING CO.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV49/2014

Security for costs ordered because plaintiff established likelihood of impecuniosity and probable difficulty and expense in enforcing costs against the defendant's interest in jointly owned, encumbered Property; the appeal did not show substantial prospects of success on its core factual challenge; exercise of discretion required ordering security of HK$300,000, two months to pay, stay pending payment and dismissal if unpaid, with costs of the application to the plaintiff.
7 May 2012

TAM PO KEI v. TAM BO KIN AND OTHERS

Citation

TAM PO KEI v. TAM BO KIN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV267/2010

The Court of Appeal allowed the respondents' appeal because the trial judge's adverse findings against the 1st respondent on the principal accounting complaints were either unsupported by the totality of evidence or produced a risk of double recovery. The court held that the trial judge overlooked the contemporaneous documentary evidence and his own findings that the Father remained in control and had approved transactions (invoking the Duomatic concept), thereby undermining the basis for ordering the 1st‑5th respondents to buy out the petitioner. Only the finding that access to books had bee…
4 Aug 2011

BAUHINIA CATERING MANAGEMENT CO LTD v. HEUNG SAI KIT AND OTHERS

Citation

BAUHINIA CATERING MANAGEMENT CO LTD v. HEUNG SAI KIT AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5561/2006

Leave to appeal refused because the defence failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or that the trial judge's factual conclusions were plainly wrong; application for stay of execution refused for lack of exceptional circumstances; costs to follow the event to be borne by defendants.
24 Mar 2011

ANSAR MOHAMMAD v. GLOBAL LEGEND TRANSPORTATION LTD

Citation

ANSAR MOHAMMAD v. GLOBAL LEGEND TRANSPORTATION LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV162/2010

The Master was entitled to find on the balance of probabilities that the plaintiff had pre-existing degenerative vulnerability at L5/S1 and that the accident either caused or materially worsened the disc condition; the Court of Appeal will not disturb the Master's factual findings absent clear error, but will adjust quantum where appropriate — accepting a 10% post-accident salary increase as evidenced and awarding a global sum for loss of earning capacity of $30,000.
14 Feb 2008

WONG SUI-KWAN v. CHEONG PUI FAN

Citation

WONG SUI-KWAN v. CHEONG PUI FAN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV146/2007

The trial judge's factual findings, including preference for the defendant's account on commission terms and rejection of the plaintiff's oral Rider agreement, were not shown to be plainly wrong; therefore the appeal was dismissed and only the drafting of the account order was varied to reflect the judge's findings on which files and periods commissions were payable.