Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Election (preclusion)

Legal area

Court

15 Sept 1983

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4315/1983

Facility Letters were construed as offering term loans subject to an express reservation allowing the lenders to reduce, withdraw or call the facilities (post-review they became repayable on demand); no implied term prevented demand or required notice; initiating the prior tort action did not amount to an irrevocable election to repudiate the loan contracts; triable issues existed as to loans made for purchase of Paliburg shares and as to consideration for certain guarantees, so unconditional leave to defend was required in those actions; where no triable issue existed the plaintiffs were ent…
15 Sept 1983

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4301/1983

The court held that on construction the Facility Letters did not prevent the lenders calling loans for immediate repayment after the review date and that the reservation to reduce or withdraw facilities meant loans could be called in; implications contended for by defendants were not necessary for business efficacy and conflicted with express terms; the earlier fraud action did not constitute an election precluding recovery on the loans; triable issues existed as to certain Paliburg share transactions and consideration for guarantees, and unconditional leave to defend must be granted where tr…
15 Sept 1983

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA6768/1983

On construction and implication from the facility letters and surrounding circumstances the loans were not in every case prematurely demanded; however triable issues existed concerning loans used to purchase Paliburg shares and concerning consideration for several guarantees; where no triable issue existed the plaintiffs were entitled to summary judgment for principal sums claimed; unconditional leave to defend was granted only in actions where triable issues were identified.
15 Sept 1983

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4324/1983

The Facility Letters were properly construed as term loans subject to an express reservation allowing the lenders at their sole discretion to reduce or withdraw the facility and, after review dates, loans could be called in on demand; defendants failed to raise triable issues from express or implied terms except in relation to loans connected to Paliburg share acquisitions and questions of consideration for guarantees, and therefore summary judgment was appropriate in the specified actions while unconditional leave to defend was granted where triable issues exist.
15 Sept 1983

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4317/1983

The Facility Letters were construed as loans subject to the lenders' reserved right to reduce or withdraw at their sole discretion and therefore (absent specific triable factual issues) were demandable after review dates; implied terms claimed by defendants were not warranted; commencing the earlier tort action did not constitute an election to repudiate the loan contracts; however triable issues existed concerning loans made for Paliburg share purchases and as to consideration for guarantees, so summary judgment was appropriate in many actions and leave to defend required in others.

Hong Kong Case Law

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS