Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Credibility and evidence

Legal area

Court

23 Apr 2026

何貝芳對袁國強及另一人

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2279
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2378/2017

The court found the plaintiff's allegations lacked contemporaneous supporting evidence, her credibility was weak, and the documentary and communication evidence showed she participated in drafting and accepted the terms; therefore she failed to prove duress, undue influence or unconscionability and the memorandum, property transfers and share transfer are valid and enforceable; the bank was an innocent bona fide mortgagee without notice of any overriding equitable interest.
21 Apr 2026

TOURAY SARJO v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2211
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL795/2021

Application for extension of time refused because delay of over one year and three months was inordinate, applicant gave no reliable explanation, and applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law or unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions so there was no prospect of success; accordingly leave was refused and the leave application dismissed.
23 Feb 2026

LIMBU LAXMI PRASAD v. BACHY SOLETANCHE GROUP LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKDC 251
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI2190/2021

Because the defendants conceded liability the sole issue was quantum; the plaintiff was found not credible where his evidence conflicted with contemporaneous records (work record, medical notes), he had been debarred from adducing expert medical evidence, and the contemporaneous medical records demonstrated a minor soft tissue back sprain with short sick leave and return to work; accordingly damages were assessed at PSLA HK$60,000, pre-trial loss and MPF HK$9,467, special damages HK$360, no award for loss of earning capacity, totalling HK$69,827 plus interest and costs.
23 Dec 2025

NGUYEN THI HANG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5338
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1121/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success; her grounds were bare assertions unsupported by evidence; the Board made no adverse credibility finding and properly found state protection available and internal relocation viable; absent error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality there is no basis for judicial intervention.
19 Nov 2025

GOLDJET DEVELOPMENT LTD v. RANDAL ALAN WHITECOTTON AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5268
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2337/2018

On the facts the Court found the 1st and 2nd Defendants were the masterminds of a planned joint enterprise that kidnapped the Plaintiff’s director and procured the coerced transfers; the transfers were made in breach of the 1st Defendant’s fiduciary duties and/or by duress; PT Soeria and the Defendants held the remaining funds on constructive trust for the Plaintiff; Plaintiff entitled to restitution of US$1,631,075, tracing, accounts, interest and costs; limitation did not bar the claim.
11 Nov 2025

ARSHAD MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5393
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1996/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to particularise grounds and produce supporting evidence; the Board's decision showed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality given the finding of inconsistent accounts, lack of credibility and absence of reliable corroboration, adequate opportunity had been provided to adduce evidence, and therefore there was no reasonably arguable claim with realistic prospects of success.
2 Apr 2025

TJHAI TET LIUNG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2025] HKCA 232
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP223/2024

Extension of time was refused because the applicant failed to identify any public law error in the Board's decision or any realistic prospect of success on judicial review; the Board gave detailed reasons and the court will not re-hear the merits absent error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.
28 Jan 2025

RODRIGUEZ CARRENO SAMUEL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 401
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1741/2024

Extension of time and leave were refused because the applicant's delay in filing was substantial and unexplained, his proffered reasons were not credible or supported by evidence, and the Board's decision was lawful and reasonable with no error of law or procedural unfairness.
20 Dec 2024

香港特別行政區訴黃亞新

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3596
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA121/2024

The court accepted PW1's evidence as credible and corroborated by medical reports and photographs, found the appellant's account inconsistent and implausible, concluded self-defence was not established and that the appellant intentionally assaulted PW1 causing bodily harm; on that basis the conviction was safe beyond reasonable doubt and the seven‑day custodial sentence was not manifestly excessive.
18 Dec 2024

香港特別行政區訴何慧霞

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 828
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA338/2023

Trial judge’s credibility findings and CCTV corroboration established that the appellant knowingly clamped the pack under her arm and left without paying; the physical circumstances made unawareness implausible and medical records did not demonstrate impairment at the time. The prosecution proved theft beyond reasonable doubt; appeal dismissed.