7 Nov 2025
林代銳 v. 黎康新 AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- [2025] HKCFI 5238
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA2104/2020
On the evidence the alleged oral loan agreement did not exist; the HK$23,000,000 payment was properly characterised as JV/consultancy funding routed through corporate arrangements and supported by contemporaneous remittances by JV partners, not a personal loan to Lin. Separately, the Guangzhou IPC and Guangdong HPC judgments are final and conclusive for the purpose of common law enforcement because the Mainland retrial (trial supervision) regime does not per se render Mainland judgments non‑final and, on the facts, retrial is unlikely here: the applicant parties have exhausted available party…