Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Compound interest

Legal area

Court

12 May 2026

SUNNI INTERNATIONAL LTD (in liquidation) v. KAO WAI HO FRANCIS AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2669
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1884/2018

The court granted the application to vary the costs order nisi out of time because the delay was brief, there was no deliberate fault by the plaintiff, and the application was promptly regularised; set-off was appropriate in the interests of justice though relief from sanction was unnecessary; costs were awarded against the plaintiff for the indulgence (to be taxed if not agreed) with a certificate for one counsel.
3 Feb 2026

KONEW CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL LTD v. WONG KONG HEUNG formerly known as WONG KWONG HEUNG CANDY

Citation

[2026] HKDC 181
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP4781/2022

The leave application was dismissed because the defendant failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for the substantial delay in applying for leave to appeal out of time and the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success; the discovery decision was a case management exercise of judicial discretion not shown to be plainly wrong; the allegations of tampering and bias were unsupported and rejected; costs were ordered against the defendant.
7 May 2025

KONEW CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL LTD v. WONG KONG HEUNG formerly known as WONG KWONG HEUNG CANDY

Citation

[2025] HKDC 712
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP4781/2022

Belated discovery for use on appeal was refused: the court applied the principle that evidence should have been collected and produced at the hearing below (Tsang Tak Wai) and that the Ladd v Marshall threshold for new evidence on appeal was not satisfied. The specific documentary requests were refused because Defendant failed to show reasonable diligence to obtain them before the Master hearing, the requested written confirmations were not discoverable where Plaintiff affirmed the items did not exist, and the Sale Proceeds matter was addressed by Plaintiff so the documents were unnecessary.…
15 Apr 2025

YAN TAO v. WANG JIAN

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1597
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA81/2025

Because the defendant did not file a defence the court treated the pleaded facts as admitted, including the plaintiff's pleading that he is not a money lender; accordingly s22(1)(a) MLO did not render the CLA's compound interest clause illegal and the plaintiff was entitled to judgment for the Outstanding Loan Sum and interest pursuant to the CLA; costs awarded and summarily assessed at $94,000.
15 Oct 2024

廈門新景地集團有限公司 formerly known as 廈門市鑫新景地房地產有限公司 v. ETON PROPERTIES LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2807
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL13/2011

The court held that under section 49 of the High Court Ordinance pre-judgment interest forms part of the judgment debt and therefore post-judgment interest at the judgment rate runs on the entire judgment debt inclusive of pre-judgment interest; accordingly interest is payable on the aggregate amount from 10 September 2024 until full payment.
23 Jan 2024

CHOY YUEN ON DAVID v. SOKA GAKKAI INTERNATIONAL OF HONG KONG LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 138
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2804/2018

Court varied the pre-judgment interest to prime lending rate plus 1% per annum and fixed the commencement of interest at 20 October 1999 (three months after payment) because the purpose had failed by then; court refused compound interest because defendant was a charity, the money was held in fixed deposit with no evidence of wrongful profit-making or wilful default and the claimant did not pursue an account; costs of the written submissions are to form part of the trial costs.
27 Apr 2022

HMM (HONG KONG) LIMITED (formerly known as HYUNDAI MERCHANT MARINE (HONG KONG) LIMITED) v. MA CHUN KIT AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1153
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA619/2016

The court accepted the plaintiff's evidence and the defendant's criminal conviction for the 260 transactions, found that the defendant owed fiduciary duties and breached them by misappropriating the plaintiff's funds and converting banking tokens, and therefore entered judgment for equitable compensation equal to the total sum misappropriated with compound interest and continued the mareva injunction for 12 months.
1 Nov 2021

LAU KOON YING MATTHEW, as the executor of the estate of LAU YIU WING, deceased (“the Deceased”) v. LAU TARK WING AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1632
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV510/2020

Taking the three related appeals as a composite whole the plaintiff was entitled to partial success in this court (successful on Rental Proceeds but not Sale Proceeds) and therefore awarded two‑thirds of the costs of the appeals in the Court of Appeal with certificate for two counsel; having regard to the judge's apportionment that 75% of the costs before the judge related to compound interest, it is fair that the defendants recover two‑thirds of that part, so the plaintiff must pay 50% of the defendants' costs of the appeals before the judge with certificate for two counsel; costs of written…
1 Nov 2021

LAU KOON YING MATTHEW, as the executor of the estate of LAU YIU WING, deceased (“the Deceased”) v. LAU TARK WING AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1632
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV508/2020

Taking the three appeals as a composite whole and applying a broad brush apportionment to reflect partial success on different issues, the court awarded the plaintiff two-thirds of the costs of the appeals in this court with certificate for two counsel, and ordered the plaintiff to pay 50% of the defendants' costs of the appeals before the judge with certificate for two counsel, because the plaintiff succeeded on compound interest for Rental Proceeds while the defendants succeeded on Sale Proceeds and the judge had previously apportioned 75% of relevant costs to the compound interest issue.
1 Nov 2021

LAU KOON YING MATTHEW, as the executor of the estate of LAU YIU WING, deceased (“the Deceased”) v. LAU TARK WING AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1632
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV509/2020

Taking the appeals as a composite whole and applying a broad brush approach, the Court ordered that the plaintiff recover two-thirds of the costs of the appeals in this court (with certificate for two counsel) and that the plaintiff pay 50% of the defendants' costs of the appeals before the judge (with certificate for two counsel); the costs of written submissions on costs are to be treated as part of the costs of the appeals before this court; a global costs order covering CACV 508, 509 and 510/2020 was made.