Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Limitation ordinance s.26

Legal area

Court

16 Oct 2025

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4997
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3391/2016

A defendant who intends to advance a factual case contradicting a plaintiff's pleaded date of discovery must plead that alternative positive case; a bare denial is insufficient under RHC O.18 r.13(5). Unpleaded positive cases may not be raised at trial because pleadings define trial issues and allowing them causes unfair prejudice; accordingly the 6th Defendant cannot contend the fraud was discoverable earlier than 23 December 2013.
18 Sept 2013

CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET AND OTHERS v. WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET AND OTHERS v. WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA537/2013

It is not plain and obvious that the plaintiffs could with reasonable diligence have discovered the fraud before 2010/2011 because the defendants' public announcements in 2005 were misleading and tended to conceal earlier Beijing court decisions; factual issues remain to be tried on s.26 and the defendants failed to show no possibility the extension could succeed; ordering a preliminary issue would be premature and not plainly advantageous, therefore the 2nd defendant's summons to strike out or order a preliminary issue is dismissed.
5 Jun 2012

SUN FOCUS INVESTMENT LTD v. TANG SHING BOR AND ANOTHER

Citation

SUN FOCUS INVESTMENT LTD v. TANG SHING BOR AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA538/2007

The court exercised its discretion to order security for costs but limited the order to costs which may be incurred in relation to the current security for costs applications and the Amendment Summons because it would be premature and inappropriate to order security for the entire action before leave to amend and the s.26 limitation issue are resolved; the appropriate quantum of security was fixed at HK$360,000 and proceedings are stayed until security is given subject to enumerated exceptions.
10 Feb 2011

NOVUS INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD v. GOOD EARTH AGRICULTURAL CO LTD

Citation

NOVUS INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD v. GOOD EARTH AGRICULTURAL CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL16/2008

The court construed the distributorship agreement in favour of Novus (Good Earth was required to account 92% of the actual resale price and was not entitled to retain an undisclosed onsale margin), declined to impose a fiduciary duty, but held Novus's claim was statute-barred because Novus could with reasonable diligence have discovered Good Earth’s onsale margin practice in 1997-1998; accordingly the contractual claim failed on limitation and was dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS

CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET AND OTHERS v. WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC AND ANOTHER

SUN FOCUS INVESTMENT LTD v. TANG SHING BOR AND ANOTHER

NOVUS INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD v. GOOD EARTH AGRICULTURAL CO LTD