Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sale at undervalue

Legal area

Court

17 Sept 2021

RADIANT FORTUNE INTERNATIONAL LTD v. THING ON CAPITAL LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2931
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1354/2021

The summons for an injunction was dismissed because the court could not finally determine the asserted right to redeem on the evidence and authorities before it, the undertakings offered by the 1st defendant and senior receivers adequately protected the plaintiff's interest (option to redeem if accepted tender below HK$300,000,000), there was no clear inadequacy of damages, and on balance the court should not intervene in the commercial sale process; accordingly injunctive relief was refused and costs were ordered against the plaintiff.
10 Mar 2021

DAH SING BANK LTD v. DYNASTY MANAGEMENT LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 563
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2554/2018

The application to stay execution is dismissed because the undervalue point is precluded by issue estoppel from the earlier final decision; no appeal has been lodged and the purported fresh evidence (Rofta Report) fails to satisfy the Ladd v Marshall criteria (no satisfactory explanation for late production and it would not, if believed, have the requisite effect), so there is no arguable appeal warranting a stay.
9 Mar 2021

ANTHONY ERIC RYAN HOTUNG v. HOTUNG, MICHAEL ERIC A.B. AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 601
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1216/2006

The trustee breached the duty to inform the plaintiff of his beneficial interests on reaching majority but the plaintiff failed to prove any loss or causation arising from that breach and failed to adduce sufficient admissible evidence to substantiate the alleged dubious payments or an undervalue sale; accordingly only nominal damages (HK$1) were awarded, and new evidence and proposed pleadings amendments were refused as prejudicial and hopeless.
4 Aug 2020

DAH SING BANK LTD v. DYNASTY MANAGEMENT LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1695
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2554/2018

The defendants' assertions that they did not receive the Notice of Sale and that the property was sold at undervalue were found not believable and unsupported by credible evidence (no independent expert valuation, no evidence of purchaser connection, and auctions/valuation supported sale). The statutory stay was properly lifted due to unjustified delay in legal aid application. There was no triable issue; summary judgment and orders below were therefore affirmed and appeal dismissed.
21 Jul 2017

LEE KAI HUNG KENNETH v. LO SUI LIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEE KAI HUNG KENNETH v. LO SUI LIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP979/2016

On the evidence and credibility findings the court concluded that HK$6,722,414 derived from the proceeds of sale was applied to accounts associated with the respondents and must be repaid to the Estate; claims by respondents for larger sums were unsupported by documentary evidence and were rejected; the undisputed sum of HK$5,340,000 provided by the applicant is to be recognised in the Estate accounts.
9 Mar 2017

BASAB INC. AND ANOTHER v. SUPERB GLORY HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

BASAB INC. AND ANOTHER v. SUPERB GLORY HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA6/2014

The claims against the receivers were struck out because, as a matter of substance, the plaintiffs' alleged loss was merely reflective of Accufit’s loss arising from the sale at undervalue; the no reflective loss principle therefore barred the plaintiffs' claims including the pleaded conspiracy and equitable compensation claims, and the injunction claim was unnecessary following the BVI refusals of derivative leave.
7 Jul 2000

RE: LAM YUK HA and EX PARTE: CHEKIANG FIRST BANK LTD.

Citation

RE: LAM YUK HA and EX PARTE: CHEKIANG FIRST BANK LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB484/2000

The court found no binding agreement on the terms alleged because the concessions were conditional on surrender of possession by 17 August 1999 which the Debtors did not comply with; contemporaneous records supported the Bank's version; even if an agreement existed it would lack consideration under Re Selectmove; the Debtors failed to show a prima facie case that the sale was at an undervalue sufficient to defeat the bankruptcy petitions, and therefore bankruptcy orders were made.
30 Jun 1987

HO WING CHEONG t/a HONG LEONG SECURITIES AND OTHERS v. GRAHAM MARGOT AND ANOTHER

Citation

HO WING CHEONG t/a HONG LEONG SECURITIES AND OTHERS v. GRAHAM MARGOT AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV78/1987

The Court dismissed the appeal because the judge had a proper basis to conclude the proposed sale might be at an undervalue and his discretionary, time-limited injunction to preserve assets until market forces could determine value was not shown to be based on wrong principles or plainly wrong.