Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

District court procedure

Legal area

Court

31 Aug 2023

K CASH EXPRESS LTD (formerly known as KONEW FINANCIAL EXPRESS LTD) v. CHAN CHING WAI

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1213
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP349/2022

Charging orders obtained by the plaintiff are orders of the court and are not acts of alienation by the owner within ss 17B and 27A of the Housing Ordinance; therefore they are not void or criminal. The court has jurisdiction to order sale and to order delivery of vacant possession to an equitable chargee in enforcement of a charging order. Exercising that discretion judicially, the judge upheld the order for sale, dismissed the defendant's appeals, but extended the time to deliver vacant possession by 42 days from service of the decision.
15 Sept 2016

陳對伍

Citation

陳對伍
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC392/2015

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed because the applicant has no realistic prospect of success and merely re-argues disputed facts and challenges credibility findings of the trial judge; no other reasons of fairness exist to justify granting leave.
28 Feb 1990

BIG ISLAND CONTRACTING (HK) LTD v. SKINK LTD

Citation

BIG ISLAND CONTRACTING (HK) LTD v. SKINK LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV198/1989

The Court upheld the District Judge's finding that practical completion/substantial performance had not been achieved because a crucial element of the contracted works—the sprinkler modification on the 13th floor—remained unexecuted and defects affecting safety persisted; accordingly the plaintiffs were not entitled to the 25% payment claimed and the judge did not err in refusing leave to amend given pleading deficiencies and the proper exercise of discretion.
21 Sept 1984

LOU KIM HUNG ALIAS LAU KIM HUNG v. WONG MEI WAH

Citation

LOU KIM HUNG ALIAS LAU KIM HUNG v. WONG MEI WAH
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV109/1984

The appeal was allowed and the action remitted to the District Court for full trial because the defendant raised potentially substantive issues (notably the claim of an irrevocable licence) that were not properly argued or supported below; therefore summary possession procedure was inappropriate and the Originating Summons should be treated as a Writ so normal procedure and evidence can be taken.
21 May 1981

LAU SAU-MUI FANNY v. PACIFIC REALTY LTD

Citation

LAU SAU-MUI FANNY v. PACIFIC REALTY LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2745/1981

Order 12 Rule 1(2) RSC does not apply in the District Court because it is expressly excluded by the Schedule; accordingly a company may file a defence and counterclaim signed by a director under Rule 21(1) of the District Court Civil Procedure (General) Rules without a solicitor, but must obtain leave under s.15(1)(d) if it wishes a non-solicitor to have a right of audience to address the Court.
29 Aug 1975

CHARTERED FINANCE (HK) LTD v. LEE SEONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHARTERED FINANCE (HK) LTD v. LEE SEONG AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ10124/1974

Order 84 R.3 of the Rules of the Supreme Court applies to proceedings in the District Court by virtue of Rule 9 of the District Court Civil Procedure (General) Rules; consequently plaintiffs seeking judgment for a debt or liquidated demand arising from a hire-purchase agreement cannot enter default judgment without leave, and leave must be refused where there is a fair arguable case that the sum claimed may be a penalty.

Hong Kong Case Law

K CASH EXPRESS LTD (formerly known as KONEW FINANCIAL EXPRESS LTD) v. CHAN CHING WAI

陳 對 伍

BIG ISLAND CONTRACTING (HK) LTD v. SKINK LTD

LOU KIM HUNG ALIAS LAU KIM HUNG v. WONG MEI WAH

LAU SAU-MUI FANNY v. PACIFIC REALTY LTD

CHARTERED FINANCE (HK) LTD v. LEE SEONG AND ANOTHER

陳對伍