Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Damages quantification

Legal area

Court

6 Mar 2026

CAIDAO CAPITAL LTD v. HARMEN CHRISTIAAN OVERDIJK AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1326
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2912/2017

The court found on the evidence that the Employment Agreements were validly varied to an 80/20 revenue split effective 1 January 2016; the monthly HK$100,000 payments were wages/advances on account of TFRS and could not be treated as forfeited; there was no consensus that TFRS entitlement was conditional on passing an independent audit; the Complyport/Somer exercise did not constitute an independent audit such that its adverse findings could negate TFRS entitlements; accordingly CCL’s claims seeking repayment of monthly payments and assorted loss claims were dismissed; AIC was entitled to HK$…
12 Dec 2025

CHEUNG KONG PROPERTY (BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT) LTD v. GOLD BRILLIANT INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6181
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA280/2021

The court found the Defendants breached the ROFR Deed by failing to serve a Proposal Notice; the alleged representations were negotiation posturing and not clear, unequivocal promises to forgo rights, the Plaintiff lacked the requisite knowledge and clause 9.04 was not overridden; implied terms claimed were unnecessary or contradicted express terms; on causation the Plaintiff would, on balance, have exercised the ROFR and there was a real and substantial chance MTRC/IB would have agreed such that loss of a chance is established; damages for that chance assessed at HK$1,574,718,422.90 (after a…
17 Apr 2025

富嘉花園業主立案法團 v. IN SMART LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKLdT 18
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM185/2022

The passageway outside Shop 7 is part of the Covered Walkway and therefore common parts; R2 used it for her fruit business and R1 permitted that use such that both breached Clause 14 of the DMC and ss.34I(1)(a) and (b)(i) of the BMO; the acquiescence defence failed because plaintiffs showed enforcement history, lack of continuous notorious practice affecting nearly all shops, and respondents failed to prove detrimental reliance or a proprietary equity; accordingly mandatory and prohibitory injunctions were granted but damages were dismissed for lack of proven quantum.
16 Aug 2024

GREEN LIGHT MULTIPLEX CO. LTD (formerly known as GREEN LIGHT MARKETING CO. LTD and GLM INTERNATIONAL LTD) v. LAM SHI YAN

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2101
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2294/2017

The 1st defendant, as General Manager, owed fiduciary and implied contractual duties; he breached those duties by actively procuring Abacus to treat Pinetum as its exclusive distributor and by diverting a mature business opportunity (P533) to Automatic Limited, thereby causing provable loss to the plaintiff in the Univision, HKZM Bridge and P533 matters. Other claims (Discovery Park, Consignment Arrangement, portions of Happy Valley) were not sufficiently proved. The Employment Agreement ended on 7 November 2014; the plaintiff’s claim succeeds in part and the 1st defendant’s counterclaim succ…
5 Jul 2024

CHANG YUEN SHEUNG 對 LO FUNG

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1111
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1568/2018

On the balance of probabilities the defendant intentionally pushed the plaintiff from behind, constituting a tortious battery; the defendant's prior conviction for common assault is admissible and supports the finding; inconsistencies in the defendant's accounts and the contemporaneous video corroborate the plaintiff's account; causation insofar as the battery occurred is established and plaintiff is entitled to damages, although the quantum is reduced by credibility findings and medical evidence.
1 Mar 2023

CHAN HIU YI 對 THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF YUET MING BUILDING YUET WAH STREET

Citation

[2023] HKLdT 15
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM151/2021

On the balance of probabilities the external wall had defects which were at least one source of the applicant's internal wall water ingress; the incorporated owners, having been on notice and having had sufficient information and opportunity to investigate and to commission repairs, failed to take appropriate steps and therefore breached their statutory duty under s.18(1)(a) BMO; the applicant proved loss but not the full amount claimed, and a fair award for external and internal repairs and related measures was HKD 83,330.6 plus interest and costs.
25 Feb 2022

BRETON JEAN v. HK BELLAWAYS JET LTD

Citation

[2022] HKDC 173
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3612/2017

The court granted leave because the appellant established an arguable construction point on the proper meaning of 'day off' and 'standby' in OMA Rev 2 and related contractual provisions that has a reasonable prospect of success on appeal; factual findings at trial were otherwise upheld and the matter warrants appellate consideration.
24 Apr 2018

李德強 v. 大家樂集團有限公司

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 889
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA44/2017

The Court held that the Labour Tribunal had jurisdiction because the Claimant's claim could properly be treated as alleging breach of an implied term of the Employment Contract (the anti-avoidance implied term); accordingly leave to appeal was granted on multiple arguable points of law (Grounds 2–6, 8 limited and 9) for full ventilation at appeal. The trial judge's findings that dismissal was unreasonable and relevant to motive were properly linked to the contractual breach issue and did not render the Tribunal without jurisdiction.
28 Feb 2018

PROMO INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHAE MAN TOCK AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 284
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1337/2010

The court accepted the admissibility and evidential weight of the defendants' subsisting criminal convictions under s62 and the cumulative documentary and email evidence; on the overall assessment the defendants were employees of the plaintiff during the 2nd Period, they breached their duties by inflating supplier invoices and receiving secret commissions, plaintiff proved loss of USD893,142.60 on the Scott Schedule and is entitled to compensatory damages with pre-judgment interest; exemplary damages and compound interest were declined; first defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
7 Jul 2017

DAVID JOHN SLATER v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

DAVID JOHN SLATER v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI646/2012

Judge accepted joint orthopaedic experts that plaintiff suffered L5/S1 disc extrusion with ongoing risk but was fit for managerial office duties from July 2012; awarded PSLA at claimed level ($250,000) but rejected most claims for loss of full-time earnings and fringe benefits after mutual termination because termination was voluntary and not caused by the injury; awarded MPNCC allowance loss only for the period to mutual termination, accepted defendant's concession of $80,000 for loss of earning capacity, set off employees' compensation of $99,072 and awarded interest and costs orders nisi.