Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Legal area

Court

19 Feb 2025

MAN POWER MOTORS COMPANY LTD v. TAI PING MOTOR TRADING CO. LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1593
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCIP5/2023

The Plaintiff proved ownership of the relevant copyright drawings by unchallenged evidence and a section 121 affirmation; the Defendants produced component parts substantially similar to the Plaintiff's protected designs demonstrating copying; the Defendants' defences (authorship by Lau and asserted short-term patent) lacked merit or were revoked; accordingly the Plaintiff succeeds on the claim for copyright infringement and is entitled to costs assessed at $900,000.
3 Dec 2024

VOGEL INDUSTRIES (M) SDN BHD v. VOGELSITZE GMBH AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3482
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCIP56/2023

The strike‑out applications were refused because the Statement of Claim, though ambiguous, disclosed an arguable case that the Design Drawings may be original and protectable given skill and labour in their preparation; the correct remedy was to grant the plaintiff general leave to amend its pleadings to clarify whether the claim is based on the drawings or the design per se, and to permit the 1st and 3rd Defendants to reapply to strike out if the amended pleadings remain unarguable.
15 Aug 2024

MIELE & CIE. KG AND ANOTHER v. INSTANT SERVICES (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2105
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCIP31/2022

Defendants repeatedly made unchallenged or inadequately explained misrepresentations (warranty claims, use of Plaintiffs' contact details, promotion as authorised dealer) and used registered Miele marks and Plaintiffs' copyright works on websites/social media without consent; statutory presumptions and evidence favoured Plaintiffs; Defendants failed to discharge burdens to show triable defences under Order 14 or to rebut s121; s20 exhaustion and late disclaimers do not avail; 2nd Defendant controlled the company and is liable as joint tortfeasor; accordingly summary judgment for Plaintiffs on…
21 Feb 2024

H&M HENNES & MAURITZ GBC AB v. ROADGET BUSINESS PTE LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 545
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCIP45/2022

Section 3(1) of the TBPCO covers debts and obligations accrued before the transfer including liabilities in respect of pending claims whose quantum is unascertained; where a related action was instituted before transfer and no effective notice under the Ordinance was given, the transferee becomes liable for monetary liabilities arising from that action; however injunctive relief is a personal discretionary remedy and does not automatically bind a transferee; only a proven transferee is liable under s3(1).
24 Nov 2023

CHAN CHUNG SING v. QUPITAL LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3042
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA40/2023

The appeal is dismissed because the plaintiff cannot avoid the consequences of the earlier dismissal for non-compliance by blaming his solicitor; established authorities attribute solicitors\' default to their clients, and a second action based on the same cause after dismissal for non-compliance is an abuse of process absent special reasons, which the plaintiff failed to establish. Further, pursuing this appeal while relief from sanctions in the earlier action remains available constitutes an abuse and would permit impermissible re-litigation and circumvention of sanctions.
20 Mar 2023

CULTURECOM LTD AND ANOTHER v. JADE DYNASTY PUBLICATIONS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 805
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCIP64/2020

On the evidence of long continued acknowledgements, licence agreements and conduct over about 20 years the court concluded the 1st Plaintiff is the owner of the intellectual property rights in Little Rascals and the Defendants are estopped from asserting contrary ownership; Defendants have no arguable defence, Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm to licensing business and goodwill, and the balance of convenience therefore favours granting the interlocutory injunction.
26 Feb 2021

KARIBU BABY LTD v. J SOLUTION INTERNATIONAL LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 465
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1674/2019

Karibu failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the injunction with penal notice had been personally served on Lau or that the strict test for dispensing with personal service was met; absent personal service on the relevant officer, committal under Order 45 could not be ordered against J Solution or Lau, so the originating summons for committal must be dismissed.
26 Mar 2020

CHOW STEEL INDUSTRIES PUBLIC CO LTD AND OTHERS v. KO SUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 483
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2711/2017

The court found plaintiffs had a good arguable case on liability and quantum before the Thai Court (Relevant Information capable of being trade secrets or copyrighted materials and EPCO a competitor), the evidence supported an inference of real risk of dissipation based on defendants' conduct and corporate network, there was no material nondisclosure by plaintiffs that would have defeated the injunction, the Thai judgment would be enforceable in Hong Kong and it was not unjust or inconvenient under s21M to continue the Mareva injunction; accordingly the discharge summons was dismissed and the…
27 Dec 2019

OWNDAYS CO., LTD AND ANOTHER v. PROFESSIONAL OPTOMETRIST LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 3147
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1718/2018

The 2nd Defendant applied to register an identical reproduction of the Plaintiffs' Artistic Work while aware of the Plaintiffs' use and ownership; objectively that conduct fell below acceptable commercial standards and amounted to bad faith under the Trade Marks Ordinance, rendering the registration void ab initio; registration does not excuse copyright infringement; summary judgment was therefore entered for the Plaintiffs, additional damages were appropriate given deliberate and flagrant copying, and indemnity costs ordered where appropriate.
29 Oct 2019

GLOWJOY GROUP CO LTD v. WONG WAI CHUN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2672
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA886/2019

The court held there is a serious question to be tried on the copyright infringement and related breach of confidence and unlawful means conspiracy claims; damages would be difficult to quantify and defendants did not demonstrate ability to pay or absence of imminent harm; on balance of convenience the plaintiff would suffer irreparable or hard‑to‑quantify harm if injunctive relief were withheld, therefore an interlocutory injunction restraining defendants from using, copying, selling or disclosing the S250 and SP800 drawings and specified technical documents was granted until trial or furthe…