Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interest entitlement

Legal area

Court

7 Oct 2013

BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD v. CHINA INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INVESTIGATION COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD v. CHINA INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INVESTIGATION COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1905/2000

The court upheld and enforced the certificate under clause 5(b) as conclusive evidence of the outstanding principal ($1,617,098.04 as at 31 Oct 1999, assessed principal $1,572,817.33 as of 9 Oct 2012) because it was not manifestly erroneous; there was no concluded settlement waiving interest; the plaintiff's unexplained inordinate delay (about 10 years) was gross and prejudicial, justifying deprivation of contractual interest for the period of delay (from a notional judgment date 7 Nov 2002) while awarding contractual interest thereafter and directing judgment interest as specified.
22 Feb 2013

LAM CHING SHEUNG v. THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF TAM SHUI, DECEASED AND OTHERS

Citation

LAM CHING SHEUNG v. THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF TAM SHUI, DECEASED AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2234/2008

The court accepted the plaintiff's evidence and found both oral agreements existed: (a) the First Oral Agreement (1999) between the plaintiff, Tam Shui and her husband by which the husband jointly assumed the loan and agreed to pay interest to Lo Brothers; and (b) the Second Oral Agreement (25 July 2006) by which the 2nd and 3rd defendants undertook to repay the loan. The plaintiff's claims were not statute‑barred because the 2nd defendant deliberately concealed the default so time began to run in November 2005; causes of action survived the death of Tam Shui; accordingly the 1st, 2nd and 3rd…
5 Nov 2004

LAM WING MAN v. CHEUNG MUI HEUNG

Citation

LAM WING MAN v. CHEUNG MUI HEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2807/2000

The court held that the resumption compensation figure includes interest and thus plaintiffs are entitled to a share of that interest; the defendant fulfilled its contractual obligation by applying to the District Lands Officer and was not contractually required to sue a third party to perfect title to Lot No. 2517; and the court has implied jurisdiction under the consent order/agreement to order discontinuance of the actions once the parties have fulfilled their obligations.
28 Oct 1986

RAVI KUMAR v. JAIN UMESH CHAND also known as UMESH JAIN

Citation

RAVI KUMAR v. JAIN UMESH CHAND also known as UMESH JAIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA6193/1984

On the balance of probabilities the judge accepted the plaintiff's evidence, found the defendant dishonest, concluded the transfers and written acknowledgement established that the loans were made to the defendant personally rather than to the Thai company, and therefore entered judgment for the plaintiff for the quantified sum plus contractual interest.

Hong Kong Case Law

BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD v. CHINA INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INVESTIGATION COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS

LAM CHING SHEUNG v. THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF TAM SHUI, DECEASED AND OTHERS

LAM WING MAN v. CHEUNG MUI HEUNG

RAVI KUMAR v. JAIN UMESH CHAND also known as UMESH JAIN