Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Novation

Legal area

Court

24 Apr 2026

SHIN HYUN SOOK v. HO PIK KEI ISAKAREN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKDC 604
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2056/2014

The Amended PASP purporting to substitute D3 for D2 was not validly proved as a variation or novation: written consent and objective evidence from all contracting parties was absent, contemporaneous correspondence did not identify D3 as purchaser, key witnesses and documents were missing, and D3 failed to discharge the burden of proof; accordingly the Amended PASP is invalid and unenforceable against the plaintiff, the plaintiff did not repudiate any valid agreement, D3's counterclaims fail, and the Land Registry registration of the Amended PASP is ordered set aside.
5 Jan 2026

AXHT COMPANY LTD v. 王一诚

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 34
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1257/2024

On the evidence as a whole the defendants failed to discharge the burden to clearly establish a novation: there was no documentation or credible conduct showing Plaintiff consented to any substitution, Andrew Wong executed a guarantee after asserting he would repay, defendants' unaffirmed affirmations were inadmissible and given no weight, and circumstantial matters (timing, guarantee, borrowers' confirmations) supported that Wang and Li remained borrowers; accordingly judgments were entered for the Plaintiff and indemnity costs awarded.
5 Jan 2026

AXHT COMPANY LTD v. 李克凡

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 34
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1258/2024

On the evidence the Plaintiff advanced the loans under the Loan Agreements; the Defendants failed to discharge the burden to prove novation to Andrew Wong because there was no evidence of creditor consent or contemporaneous documentation, Andrew executed a Guarantee inconsistent with his being the borrower, unaffirmed affirmations are inadmissible and in any event the novation case was inherently uncredible; judgment was therefore entered for the Plaintiff and costs awarded on an indemnity basis in accordance with the Loan Agreements.
12 Dec 2025

CHEUNG KONG PROPERTY (BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT) LTD v. GOLD BRILLIANT INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6181
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA280/2021

The court found the Defendants breached the ROFR Deed by failing to serve a Proposal Notice; the alleged representations were negotiation posturing and not clear, unequivocal promises to forgo rights, the Plaintiff lacked the requisite knowledge and clause 9.04 was not overridden; implied terms claimed were unnecessary or contradicted express terms; on causation the Plaintiff would, on balance, have exercised the ROFR and there was a real and substantial chance MTRC/IB would have agreed such that loss of a chance is established; damages for that chance assessed at HK$1,574,718,422.90 (after a…
9 Apr 2025

RE BGA HOLDINGS LTD (Formerly Known as BEIBU GULF OCEAN SHIPPING (GROUP) LTD)

Citation

[2025] HKCA 322
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV557/2021

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals because the primary judge did not err in finding no bona fide dispute on substantial grounds: contemporaneous documents (notably audited financial statements recording the PBM loan as current and repayable on demand), the absence of credible documentary corroboration for the alleged express/oral treatment, the implausibility of the alleged unanimous‑consent arrangement or implied term, and the lack of any binding vessel sale or effective novation meant the loan remained payable and the judge’s factual evaluation was not palpably wrong; appellate inter…
1 Apr 2025

RE PAUL Y. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1271
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW10/2025

The Court authorised the Provisional Liquidators to carry on the KT Project Business and to pay or authorise payments out of monies received under the KT Project Contract because continuation, on the evidence and bearing considerable weight to the PLs’ commercial judgment, was likely to preserve assets and be for the benefit of the general body of creditors notwithstanding inherent uncertainties; accordingly payments and new debts incurred in the ordinary course of that business were validated and protected from avoidance under s182 analogue.
27 Jan 2025

HANG CHIN MARBLE ENGINEERING LTD v. PACIFIC MARBLE & GRANITE LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 480
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT9/2019

Court concluded on balance that an oral agreement existed with rates $84/sqft (dry) and $50/sqft (wet); the written Contract was signed later and did not accurately record those rates. Court rejected Defendant's claim that $2,080,000 of the KW Payment related to the Project. Most Plaintiff additional/omitted claims were not proved and were disallowed; certain claims were allowed (skirting/cornice balance and limited contra charges for damaged marble and forklift hire). Defendant ordered to pay costs on a nisi basis and parties to submit final assessment for sealing of judgment.
14 May 2024

YEUNG MAN v. NEW WINNING FINANCE COMPANY LTD, (IN LIQUIDATION), a Creditor

Citation

[2024] HKCA 451
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV239/2022

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to raise a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds: the Repayment Arrangement, even if characterised as novation or contract, lacked evidence of the necessary consent and lacked evidence that Wen had authority (actual or apparent) to bind the Petitioner; the judge's detailed scrutiny of affirmations and documents was appropriate and his conclusion that the debtor's case was unbelievable was open to him.
31 Jan 2024

NG LEUNG MING t/a MING KEE ENG CONSTRUCTION CO v. HANKI CONTRACTORS (HONG KONG) & ASSOCIATES LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 376
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA295/2020

On the proper construction of the Agreement and surrounding circumstances the Defendant did not agree on 4 April 2019 to assume Homeland's pre-termination liabilities for the Stage 2 invoices; Alfred Wong had apparent authority to act for the Defendant but his communications did not constitute a novation or unconditional guarantee by the Defendant; only HK$257,800 was payable by the Defendant in respect of the 8 May 2019 invoice for post-termination work; the three other post-termination invoices were not proved delivered nor the works proved; the HK$100,000 and HK$200,000 were advance/part-p…
17 Nov 2022

RE BGA HOLDINGS LTD (Formerly Known as BEIBU GULF OCEAN SHIPPING (GROUP) LTD)

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1723
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV557/2021

The applications to adduce new evidence were refused because the Company failed to satisfy the Ladd v Marshall criteria: Zhou's affirmation could have been obtained with reasonable diligence before the hearing and would not have materially affected the outcome given her limited personal knowledge and the existence of contemporaneous documents; Lau's later witness statement added nothing new as it duplicated an earlier BVI affirmation already before the judge. The Judge's finding that the Company failed to raise a bona fide dispute was upheld and the convictions as to repayability on demand, a…