Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs on indemnity basis

Legal area

Court

11 Mar 2026

CHEUNG WAN OI KANDY v. LAM CHUNG MAN MANDY AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 344
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1556/2020

Plaintiff's claims were dismissed because the court found plaintiff unreliable and the recordings selective; there was no proved making of the pleaded 1st–7th representations by D1, and where statements were made they were non-actionable opinions or related to a proposed/unidentified policy; plaintiff did not establish but-for reliance because explanatory and no-reliance contractual disclaimers and PowerPoint disclaimers informed her to seek independent advice and the Chubb policy was explained by licensed insurance agents at Greater China; any duties asserted could not be implied into the ex…
13 Feb 2026

CHAN BENAMI HOLDINGS LTD v. CHI CHI HUNG, KENNETH

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 993
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1547/2024

Plaintiff established a prima facie case that the defendant agreed to and completed the transaction but failed to pay HK$4.5 million; the defendant failed to adduce credible, particularised evidence of illegitimate pressure, contemporaneous protest, lack of alternatives or continuing duress and in any event affirmed and benefitted from the transaction, so the economic duress defence discloses no triable issue; accordingly summary judgment is appropriate, contractual interest at 9% applies pre- and post-judgment and costs are payable on an indemnity basis as contracted.
15 Dec 2025

YAN MEI and YAN DONG the Joint and Several Administrators of the Estate of FONG LAP CHUNG GEORGE, Deceased AND ANOTHER v. FONG LAP SHAN

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6437
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA104/2023

Given repeated non-compliance with the Interim Payment Order and subsequent Payment Order, absence of good reason or adequate evidence of financial incapacity, and the availability of other enforcement measures which were not pursued earlier, it is appropriate and proportionate to impose an unless order limited to debarment of the 1st Plaintiff from defending the Defendant's counterclaim unless the 1st Plaintiff pays HK$460,538 by 4pm on 19 January 2026; costs awarded to defendant on an indemnity basis summarily assessed at HK$120,000.
28 Oct 2025

NEW ART HOLDINGS CO., LTD. AND OTHERS v. EST-OUEST AUCTIONS CO., LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4979
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA325/2024

Relief from sanction is granted for the 2nd Plaintiff because, on balance of the Order 2 rule 5(1) factors, the 2nd Plaintiff has a meritorious claim, the failure to comply was not intentional, the prejudice of dismissal would be disproportionate, and the 2nd Plaintiff has since taken steps to pay security; relief is refused for the 1st Plaintiff because its claim lacks merit and standing. The Plaintiffs are to pay defendants' costs on an indemnity basis with specified summary assessments and the 2nd Plaintiff is given seven days to pay the ordered security.
22 Sept 2025

JADESPRING LTD (AS TRUSTEE AND/OR AGENT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF DAH SING BANK) v. RISE TOP ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4498
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2040/2023

Preliminary assessment found the appeal grounds unmeritorious and not reasonably arguable: clause 5.1(b)(3) of the Rental Assignment authorised the plaintiff to sue without the bank's prior written consent; the original affirmation verified the facts necessary for the amendment so no fresh affidavit was required; defendants chose not to file evidence or seek adjournment and provided no evidence they could not pay the judgment debt or that they would suffer irreparable prejudice; accordingly stay of execution pending appeal refused and indemnity costs awarded to the plaintiff.
29 Aug 2025

ORIENTAL FA LTD v. TO YUEN FANG LOUISE AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3886
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA919/2024

Default judgment was granted because the 2nd defendant had a full opportunity to defend and its relevant defences were abandoned or struck out; the plaintiff filed the necessary affirmations under Order 88 r 5 and adequately addressed occupier particulars such that no further notice was required given common control and tenancy breach; production of the original mortgage is not required in writ actions; paper disposal was within the court's case management powers; no evidence justified extending the usual 28-day possession period; costs were awarded on an indemnity basis pursuant to the mortg…
22 Jul 2025

K v. A

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3602
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2186/2021

Respondent knowingly disobeyed two injunction orders protecting HVD; Count 1 was partly purged (purge dated 2 July 2021) reducing the starting custodial sentence from one month to two weeks; Count 2 was not purged and was more serious so the starting point of two months was reduced to six weeks; sentences to run concurrently; costs of sentencing to be paid by respondent to applicant on an indemnity basis and bail granted pending appeal.
15 Jul 2025

EGO FINANCE LTD v. CHAN LAP CHUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1141
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP339/2024

The court granted summary money judgment because the Loan Agreement and MLO/Order 83A requirements were satisfied and the 1st Defendant defaulted; the Legal Charge is enforceable and entitles the Plaintiff to vacant possession under Order 88; as a legal chargee the Plaintiff may seek sale under the Partition Ordinance and partition is impractical given the flat's size and design; the 2nd Defendant failed to prove a life interest by common intention constructive trust or very great hardship, therefore an order for sale was appropriate; costs awarded on indemnity basis at HKD100,000.
12 May 2025

SMART TEAM FINANCE LTD v. 范小兰 AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKDC 774
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP6297/2024

The plaintiff, as legal mortgagee of the 1st defendant's half share, is a person interested under the Partition Ordinance and has locus standi to apply for sale; partition was impracticable or would substantially devalue the property and the defendants did not object, therefore the court exercised its discretion to order sale of the whole property, appoint the plaintiff's solicitors' partner as trustee under PO s7 to receive proceeds, and allow enforcement despite a clerical non-compliance under MLO s18 by exercising s18(3) discretion; indemnity costs were awarded against the 1st defendant bu…
23 Apr 2025

HABIB BANK ZURICH (HONG KONG) LTD (formerly known as HBZ Finance Limited) v. TEE VEE BRANDS INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2100
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1059/2024

On the evidence and contractual provisions before the court the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment: the pleaded sums were established by conclusive contractual evidence, defendants failed to show any credible defence that would render the matter triable, the bank validly exercised its contractual termination right, the defendants were liable under the guarantees and mortgage and the right to possession had arisen; accordingly the originating summons was summarily disposed in favour of the plaintiff and relief granted including payment, possession and indemnity costs.