Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Registration of charges

Legal area

Court

25 Jun 2025

BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS (HONG KONG) LTD v. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2731
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP745/2025

The Side Letter is not a "specified charge" under section 334(b) because, if executed by a natural person, it would not constitute a bill of sale under the Bills of Sale Ordinance; therefore its registration under section 335 was invalid or ineffective within the meaning of section 42(1)(a)(i). The statutory preconditions in section 42(4) were satisfied because the continuing presence of the registered documents would cause material damage to the Company and the Company's interest in removal outweighed any interest of the Bank; accordingly the Court ordered removal of the Registered Documents…
17 May 2019

FANG MENG SUNG, JOHN v. LUK MAN LOK ROCKY AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1283
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1959/2009

On the balance of probabilities the loan was advanced to D2 and D3 (not D1); the Plaintiff failed to prove creation of an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds; the Plaintiff must return the title deeds to D1 as owner; the Legal Charge was voidable for solicitor's breach (abuse of confidence/material alteration) but rescission was refused on the facts; accordingly Plaintiff's claim against D1 is dismissed, D1's counterclaim for return of title deeds is allowed and D2/D3 counterclaim is dismissed.
20 Apr 2018

CELERITY SPECIAL SITUATIONS FUND I, L. P. (formerly known as DONGLIN SPECIAL SITUATIONS FUND I, L. P.) v. CHINA LINKAGE INTERNATIONAL LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 815
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2993/2016

Applying the two‑stage test, the court found the low threshold for first‑stage joinder satisfied as to Zhu, Yang and China Asia Strategic because of their active participation in the proceedings and filed affirmations, but refused joinder as to Yun because there was no evidence he participated; service on the non‑parties was validated and the matter proceeds to the second stage where assessment will be summary and they may be heard.
15 Jan 2018

CELEBRITY SPECIAL SITUATIONS FUND I, L.P. (formerly known as DONGLIN SPECIAL SITUATIONS FUND I, L.P.) v. CHINA LINKAGE INTERNATIONAL LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 63
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW120/2017

The court accepted the explanation of inadvertence and found there was some other sufficient cause and that it was just and equitable between the Petitioner and the Company (and its contributory) to grant the extension; the Company bore primary responsibility to register and should not benefit from its failure; the discretionary power under s346 was exercised in favour of the Petitioner with protective provisions for other creditors.
10 Nov 2017

HONG KONG ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD v. THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

Citation

HONG KONG ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD v. THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2177/2017

The court granted the extension because the applicant's omission to register the charge was accidental and inadvertent, there was no bad faith or withholding of material information, no prejudice to creditors or members was demonstrated, and the Registrar did not oppose the application.
7 Apr 2016

RE JOY RICH DEVELOPMENT LTD

Citation

RE JOY RICH DEVELOPMENT LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW146/2013

Fameway's legal charge, being unregistered, is void against the liquidators and creditors; therefore Fameway may prove and vote as an unsecured creditor for the shortfall of HK$21,596,438.41 based on the forced sale valuation of the property (HK$360,000,000). The proviso to the extension order does not confer priority on Fameway over Revelry Gains. The Liquidators' application to dissolve the COI fails because they must proceed via the Official Receiver and there is insufficient reason to dissolve the COI on the facts.
22 Jun 2015

CHAN KAM TONG AND OTHERS v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF GARDEN VISTA

Citation

CHAN KAM TONG AND OTHERS v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF GARDEN VISTA
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM344/2014

The Renovation falls within the management powers granted by the DMC to the manager and management committee; the management committee validly authorised the chairman to enter into the contract; contributions for the Renovation are Management Expenses apportionable under the Second Schedule of the DMC; Synergis, as agent, may collect contributions; defaulting owners are liable for interest and for registration of charges under the DMC, and memoranda of charge are to be discharged upon full payment.
9 Jan 2015

RE CAPITAL SINO INVESTMENTS LTD

Citation

RE CAPITAL SINO INVESTMENTS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2939/2014

The originating summons was adjourned sine die because the mortgagee bank, a party to the instrument sought to be rectified, had not been joined or served and there was no evidence of its consent; section 347 allows rectification subject to common law and equitable principles, and procedural fairness requires joining parties to the instrument before making a rectification order.
11 Jan 2013

劉曉東 AND ANOTHER v. CHASE EAGLE DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

劉曉東 AND ANOTHER v. CHASE EAGLE DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1709/2009

Court held that although the Huarong Assignment did not divest the plaintiffs' claim, the 1st and 2nd Transfers were defective because Cinda SZ's execution by Wang exceeded the authority granted by the Power of Attorney and the contemporaneous documents did not evidence valid written authorisation; the Cinda Deed could not cure defects pre‑existing at issue date of proceedings and ostensible authority or post‑OS ratification did not validate the transfers. Consequently there was no valid assignment of the Legal Charge to the plaintiffs and the application was dismissed.
16 Jun 2011

HALLMARK CARDS INCORPORATED v. YUN CHOY LTD (In Compulsory Liquidation) AND ANOTHER

Citation

HALLMARK CARDS INCORPORATED v. YUN CHOY LTD (In Compulsory Liquidation) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1330/2009

The RPA was an out-and-out sale of receivables (whole turnover deed) as expressed by its terms; commercial features argued by liquidators (recourse, discounting charges, rights to require repurchase, rejection of debts, accounting adjustments) are compatible with sale and do not convert the transaction into a registrable fixed charge. Future debts vested in the bank on coming into existence under the agreement so no separate consideration or separate registration issue defeated the bank's title, and section 48 Bankruptcy Ordinance does not apply via section 264 Companies Ordinance to defeat t…