Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Election and repudiation

Legal area

Court

25 Jan 2021

FU KA CHUN MARCO v. PASSION MARKETING CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKDC 45
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ171/2020

The court refused to strike out the post‑termination pleas because the legal viability of those claims was fact‑sensitive and not plainly untenable, and held that Order 18 r9 permits pleading post‑writ matters while the Eshelby rule is not absolute; applying the court’s wide discretion under Order 20 r5(1) and Order 18 r15(2) the court granted leave to amend the writ to reflect the claims pleaded in the statement of claim.
25 Jan 2021

PASSION MARKETING CO LTD v. FU KA CHUN MARCO

Citation

[2021] HKDC 45
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3388/2019

The court refused to strike out the post-termination pleas because Order 18 rule 9 permits pleading matters arising after the writ and the viability of the post-termination claim is fact-sensitive (not a plain and obvious failure). The court allowed the amendment to the writ under its broad discretion (Order 20 rule 5(1)) because the post-termination reliefs arise from the same factual matrix, no prejudice or limitation issue was shown, and the Eshelby rule, while still applicable, does not bar the amendment in these circumstances.
9 Feb 1988

CAMERON MICROSYSTEMS LTD. v. BLOOMVILLE TRADING LTD.

Citation

CAMERON MICROSYSTEMS LTD. v. BLOOMVILLE TRADING LTD.
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ24/1987

The court found the consultant had failed to perform the contractual obligation to link the Polos to the Compaq, that this failure discharged Bloomville from paying the retainer fees for the period in question, and that there was no proven professional negligence or actionable misrepresentation by the consultant; consequently both the claim for fees and the counterclaim failed and were dismissed with no order as to costs.
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

HCA4307/1983

The Facility Letters, construed in their commercial context and contra proferentem, reserved to the lenders a discretion to reduce or withdraw facilities and to call loans on demand after the review dates; no triable issues arose from the express terms or the proposed implied terms or from the plea of election, but triable issues did arise concerning loans made to purchase Paliburg shares and concerning consideration supporting certain guarantees; accordingly summary judgment was entered for plaintiffs for principal sums in specified actions where no triable issue existed and unconditional le…

Hong Kong Case Law

FU KA CHUN MARCO v. PASSION MARKETING CO LTD AND OTHERS

PASSION MARKETING CO LTD v. FU KA CHUN MARCO

CAMERON MICROSYSTEMS LTD. v. BLOOMVILLE TRADING LTD.

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