Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Mortgagee rights

Legal area

Court

2 Apr 2019

NORDDEUTSCHE LANDESBANK GIROZENTRALE, SINGAPORE BRANCH v. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL “BRIGHTOIL GLORY” (Hong Kong flag)

Citation

[2019] HKCA 395
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP49/2019

The Court refused leave to appeal because the judge acted within his discretion in granting a short limited stay rather than the three month stay sought; the judge was not plainly wrong given the substantial equity in the Vessel, the defendants' undertakings to cover maintenance and advertisement costs, and the absence of a reasonable prospect of success or other compelling interest of justice to hear the appeal.
30 Jun 2010

UDL HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER v. LEUNG YUET KEUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

UDL HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER v. LEUNG YUET KEUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV7/2010

Leave to appeal dismissed because the defendants did not acquire plaintiffs' property: Well Raise only had an equity of redemption which was effectively extinguished on default and Nippon Credit became entitled to the vessel and assigned insurance; therefore there was no misappropriation and no basis for strict liability to account for profits, and the proposed appeal was not reasonably arguable.
27 Jan 2003

LAW HING CHO AND ANOTHER v. PARKER PROPERTIES LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation

LAW HING CHO AND ANOTHER v. PARKER PROPERTIES LTD. AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP4331/2001

The court held that the plaintiffs proved by convincing and cogent evidence that a common mistake existed in the conveyancing documents such that the documents mis‑described the unit actually sold and possessed; the mistake permeated subsequent transactions and no adequate alternative remedy existed, therefore the court ordered rectification of the specified documents to give effect to the parties' true agreement.
2 Nov 2001

WING HANG BANK LTD. v. FAST KING LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation

WING HANG BANK LTD. v. FAST KING LTD. AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP3404/2000

The Court found on the evidence that a new tenancy was agreed after expiry; the grant of that new tenancy operated as a surrender of the original tenancy by operation of law thereby terminating the original tenancy despite no notice under s122(1); although the new tenancy did not bind the mortgagee for want of prior written consent, that invalidity does not prevent the surrender operating to end the original tenancy vis-à-vis the mortgagee and accordingly the mortgagee was entitled to possession. The appeal was dismissed.
12 Feb 1985

THE KA WAH BANK LTD v. PRODUCT SOUTING INTERATIONAL LTD

Citation

THE KA WAH BANK LTD v. PRODUCT SOUTING INTERATIONAL LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2032/1984

The applicant is not entitled to be joined because his alleged unregistered tenancy is void against the plaintiff as a bona fide mortgagee for valuable consideration under Land Registration Ordinance s3(2); the mortgages and charges relied on by the plaintiff were properly registered with the Companies Registry (within statutory time) and Land Office (late registration affects priority only); the other alleged claims do not affect the plaintiff's rights in these proceedings.
2 Jan 1985

YOUNG\'S ENGINEERING CO LTD v. GOLD CHERRY CO LTD

Citation

YOUNG\'S ENGINEERING CO LTD v. GOLD CHERRY CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7511/1984

Because the core dispute is ownership between the plaintiffs and the mortgagee and the plaintiffs seek final relief, it was just and convenient to join the mortgagee as a defendant under Order 15 rule 6(2)(b)(ii); the court will not decide the fixture issue at interlocutory stage but will vary the injunction as to the mortgagee subject to its undertaking, since the mortgagee in possession has a strong prima facie claim to fixtures and damages are an adequate remedy.
6 Feb 1979

DHARAMDAS AND CO (NIGERIA) LTD AND ANOTHER v. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "MINGREN DEVELOPMENT" (PANAMANIAN FLAG) AND ANOTHER

Citation

DHARAMDAS AND CO (NIGERIA) LTD AND ANOTHER v. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "MINGREN DEVELOPMENT" (PANAMANIAN FLAG) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAJ173/1978

Where cargo has been claimed and security has been lodged with the Chief Bailiff, expenses of offloading and storage shall be taken first from those securities; if securities are insufficient the balance shall form part of the Bailiff's expenses (a charge on the proceeds of sale); if securities exceed the expenses the surplus shall be returned to the party who provided the security. No special departure from established admiralty practice was warranted on the facts.
6 Feb 1979

PANASIA REALTY & FINANCE LTD v. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "MINGREN SUCCESS" (PANAMANIAN FLAG) AND ANOTHER

Citation

PANASIA REALTY & FINANCE LTD v. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "MINGREN SUCCESS" (PANAMANIAN FLAG) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAJ207/1978

The court declined to alter established admiralty practice generally and exercised its discretion to protect competing interests: claimants for cargo must deposit security satisfactory to the Chief Bailiff for offloading and storage expenses; those securities are to be applied first to those expenses and, if insufficient, the unpaid balance will form part of the Bailiff's expenses (a charge on sale proceeds); mortgagees are not held automatically liable for discharge costs absent separate successful litigation on unlawful interference.
6 Feb 1979

PANASIA REALTY & FINANCE LTD v. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "MINGREN SUCCESS" (PANAMANIAN FLAG)

Citation

PANASIA REALTY & FINANCE LTD v. THE OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL "MINGREN SUCCESS" (PANAMANIAN FLAG)
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAJ215/1978

No exceptional circumstances existed to depart from established practice; claimants for cargo must first provide security satisfactory to the Chief Bailiff and the expenses of offloading and storage in the godown in respect of claimed cargo are to be first met from those securities, any shortfall to form part of the Bailiff's expenses and any surplus returned to the security provider.
YAT TUNG INVESTMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. DAO HENG BANK LTD

Citation

YAT TUNG INVESTMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. DAO HENG BANK LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV23/1971

The appeal was dismissed because no point of law arose and the appeal was solely against findings of fact; the Full Court found no reason to disturb the trial judge's acceptance of the bank's witnesses and conclusions that the alleged oral agreement and sham assignment/mortgage were not proved.