Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Evidence and findings of fact

Legal area

Court

25 Jul 2024

羅達廣對香港安全護衛服務有限公司

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2170
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA8/2024

The Court upheld the Tribunal: the uncontested facts (pre-filled patrol log, client complaint, and the employee's refusal to obey repeated instructions to return and explain) supported the Tribunal's factual findings and lawful conclusion that the employer had cause to summarily dismiss; no legal error or perverse finding of fact was shown and the refusal to admit further witness evidence did not render the decision unreasonable.
6 Jul 2020

黃坤平對張素芬

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1435
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1716/2011

The application to extend the time to file an appeal was refused because the delay of about five years was serious and unexplained, the applicant failed to show his proposed appeal had a real prospect of success, his stated reasons (awaiting police recovery of a vehicle and belief that appeals had no time limit) were unreasonable or inconsistent, and granting relief would cause prejudice and constitute abusive use of court resources; costs were ordered against the applicant on an indemnity basis to be assessed summarily.
23 Oct 2019

XU DAZHONG v. NIPPON KAIJI KYOKAI t/a NIPPON KAIJI KYOKAI HONG KONG BRANCH

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2588
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA15/2018

The Tribunal's finding that the Subject Payments included EOY Payments was set aside because the Presiding Officer failed to give adequate reasons for that conclusion, relied improperly on the Defendant's witness without reconciling inconsistent earlier statements, and thus the question of the nature of the Subject Payments must be remitted to the Tribunal for retrial to be determined objectively in accordance with established principles of contractual interpretation and evidence.
22 Nov 2017

A & T PREMIUM AND ORGANIC FOODS LTD v. WONG WAI FONG

Citation

A & T PREMIUM AND ORGANIC FOODS LTD v. WONG WAI FONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA41/2017

The High Court held the Tribunal made factual findings based on evidence and documents, there was no demonstrated error of law or procedural unfairness, and therefore the appellant failed to show any ground to grant leave to appeal; the application for leave was dismissed.
11 Apr 2017

李錫明對金億集團 (香港)有限公司

Citation

李錫明對金億集團 (香港)有限公司
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA50/2015

The tribunal failed to consider material evidence and did not make essential findings on whether the alleged oral agreement existed or whether the claimant paid for and is entitled to reimbursement for replacement/repair of the roller shutter; accordingly the appeal is allowed in relation to that issue and the matter is remitted to the Small Claims Tribunal for rehearing of the repair and replacement cost claims pursuant to the Tribunal's duty under Cap.338 s16; costs of this appeal are to be included in the retrial.
7 Sept 2016

HAPPY ENOUGH LTD v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

Citation

HAPPY ENOUGH LTD v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDLR5/2012

Leave to appeal was refused in respect of paragraph 2.4(e)(iii) because the ground advanced raised factual issues (disputed headroom) and included a fresh demolition argument not pleaded at trial; the tribunal was not plainly wrong on the factual matters and the respondent failed to show a reasonable prospect of success under s11AA(6).
16 Jan 2013

NORA VILORIA RENON v. HEISEI FINANCE & CREDIT CO LTD

Citation

NORA VILORIA RENON v. HEISEI FINANCE & CREDIT CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA44/2012

Leave to restore the application for leave to appeal was granted and leave to appeal was allowed limited to a single point of law: whether the original loan agreement and/or any subsequent restructuring contravened the Money Lenders Ordinance (Cap 163); restoration was justified because there was a arguable ground on that statutory issue despite the applicant's inadequate explanation for absence.
11 Oct 2011

WONG KA MAN v. TANG KA LUN AND OTHERS

Citation

WONG KA MAN v. TANG KA LUN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1532/2011

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants could not show a reasonable prospect of success given the Deputy Judge's findings of fact that the 1st,2nd and 5th Defendants breached their duty (failure to keep safe braking distance) and that those findings were supported by pleas/convictions and evidence; appellate intervention on credibility/fact-finding was not justified under authority (Ting Kwok Keung).
7 Sept 2004

DESMOND YIU CHOWN LEUNG AND OTHERS v. CHOW WAI LAM WILLIAM AND ANOTHER

Citation

DESMOND YIU CHOWN LEUNG AND OTHERS v. CHOW WAI LAM WILLIAM AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV223/2003

The majority upheld the trial judge's factual findings that Mr Chow did no more than witness signatures, there was no contract of retainer and the plaintiffs' positive evidence was rejected; on that basis the plaintiffs failed to prove an assumption of responsibility or reliance causative of their loss and the appeal is dismissed with costs to the defendants.
13 Feb 2001

CHINA WEAL LTD. v. LAM SAU WAH

Citation

CHINA WEAL LTD. v. LAM SAU WAH
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV187/2000

The trial judge's factual findings that the plaintiff did not provide the purchase monies but that Mr Deng (personally) did, and that the plaintiff acted as a conduit, were not shown to be plainly wrong; absent satisfactory documentary or credible evidence that the plaintiff purchased the flat or that the defendant declared trust, the plaintiff failed to discharge the burden to displace legal title and no resulting or constructive trust was established, so the appeal is dismissed.