Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Res judicata/estoppel

Legal area

Court

29 Dec 2023

CHEUNG CHUN BIU v. LAI PAK CHEONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1853
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3671/2020

The court accepted the plaintiff's expert (Mr Leung) that the source of continuing water seepage was defective waterproofing at the shower enclosure/drainage of the Upper Property (positive eosin dye test and supporting thermographic/moisture evidence) and rejected the external wall hypothesis of the defendant's expert; the nuisance was continuing and not merged into the 2019 consent order; accordingly an injunction to abate ongoing seepage was granted but the plaintiff failed to prove spread of damage to the two bedrooms or entitlement to monetary relief, so all monetary claims were dismisse…
17 May 2023

ZHAO HUIJUN v. WILSON PARKING (HOLDINGS) LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKDC 591
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI3534/2019

On balance of probabilities the plaintiff slipped and fell on staircase No.1 on 12 November 2016 due to a wet surface (water); the defendants as occupiers/employer failed to show an adequate system to prevent such hazard and are therefore liable; plaintiff's contributory negligence assessed at 10%; credit given for prior employees' compensation payment; judgment for plaintiff in net sum HK$249,614.46 plus ordered interest and costs; D1 barred from denying occurrence inconsistent with prior consent interlocutory judgment.
17 Apr 2023

CLEVER BOY LTD AND ANOTHER v. SUM KWOK HANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 959
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2921/2017

On the balance of probabilities the 2nd defendant did not agree to be guarantor and the plaintiffs failed to prove she was party to the alleged agreement or that the HKID signature proved consent; although plaintiffs proved a total failure of consideration in respect of HK$1,400,000, the 2nd defendant was not personally enriched because she had surrendered control of her HSBC account to her brother and received funds in a ministerial/agency capacity, so restitution against her fails; change of position defence was not made out.
8 May 2015

LI MINGREN v. QUESTEX DEVELOPMENT INC. AND ANOTHER

Citation

LI MINGREN v. QUESTEX DEVELOPMENT INC. AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV141/2014

The court admitted the fresh evidence obtained from PRC proceedings because (1) the implied undertaking against use of disclosed documents ceased once the PRC court referred to those bank records in its open-court judgment (Ord 24 r.14A), and (2) Ladd v Marshall's first condition was satisfied because the documents could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence before the summary judgment hearing; the fresh evidence raised a triable issue capable of undermining the summary judgment, so leave to adduce it on appeal was granted; consequently the court declined to order security for cost…
6 Oct 2014

LAM CHUN TIM v. HONGPLUS PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS LTD

Citation

LAM CHUN TIM v. HONGPLUS PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA24/2012

The High Court held that the Labour Tribunal evaluated the evidence with care and applied the correct principles; although the Officer's suggestion to withdraw the Alternative Case (Ground 4) raised concern, it did not render the Tribunal's decision dismissing the claims against Hongplus unsustainable nor justify granting leave to appeal; therefore the applications for leave were dismissed.
10 Jan 2014

TCWF v. LKKS

Citation

TCWF v. LKKS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV166/2012

Court allowed appeal in part: findings of forgery/perjury and conspiracy based on SP1 and collateral evidence were set aside because procedural irregularity (admissibility and failure to prove documents) and estoppel/res judicata arising from the February 2011 compromise meant those issues were not properly before the ancillary relief trial; apparent bias not established; referral to DPP by judge is not appealable and was permissible; father\'s contractual rights under the Framework Agreement and Special Articles had to be taken into account at the asset‑ascertainment stage and could not be d…
7 Dec 2007

NGAI FEW FUNG v. CHEUNG KWAI HENUG

Citation

NGAI FEW FUNG v. CHEUNG KWAI HENUG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV147/2007

The Court held the second action for partition was not an abuse of process and was permissible: the Partition Ordinance expressly permits such proceedings, the ongoing joint obligation to discharge the mortgage and practical inability to realise a purchaser's rights justify allowing the claim, and the defendant failed to discharge the burden of proving abuse; matters already litigated (contributions/gift/partnership) are res judicata and may not be relitigated but that did not bar the partition claim itself.
27 Mar 2003

KARAHA BODAS CO LLC v. PERUSAHAAN PERTAMBANGAN MINYAK DAN GAS BUMI NEGARA

Citation

KARAHA BODAS CO LLC v. PERUSAHAAN PERTAMBANGAN MINYAK DAN GAS BUMI NEGARA
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT28/2002

The court refused to set aside the enforcement order because Pertamina failed to establish any of the statutory grounds in s44: the lex arbitri was Swiss (seat Geneva) so the Indonesian annulment was irrelevant; consolidation and appointment of arbitrators were permissible given the contracts' connexity and application of UNCITRAL rules; procedural complaints (adjournment/discovery) did not show denial of ability to present the case; alleged misapplication of Indonesian law raised merits issues not jurisdictional defects; public policy was not engaged. Accordingly the ex parte enforcement and…
12 Mar 1980

MALAYSIA BORNEO FINANCE CORPORATION (M) BERHAD v. SAN IMPERIAL CORPORATION LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

MALAYSIA BORNEO FINANCE CORPORATION (M) BERHAD v. SAN IMPERIAL CORPORATION LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5006/1979

The court held that the pleaded paragraph alleging a single conspiracy impermissibly alleged conduct of James Coe contrary to prior judicial findings; the statement of claim was defective in parts for ambiguity and lack of particularity but the action was not to be dismissed; instead the action was stayed and the plaintiff granted leave to amend so that overt acts could be properly pleaded without attacking prior findings.
1 Dec 1970

TAK MING CO LTD v. YEE SANG METAL SUPPLIES CO

Citation

TAK MING CO LTD v. YEE SANG METAL SUPPLIES CO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV26/1970

The Full Court held Pickering J. was entitled to correct his judgment under the Slip Rule to include interest because Briggs J.'s prior refusal did not amount to a determination on the merits and therefore did not bar a fresh correction application; Pickering J. properly exercised his discretion in granting correction notwithstanding delay, but the costs order for the correction application was varied and costs reapportioned on appeal.