Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Setting aside compromise

  • 2 Dec 2008

    SEAN ERIC MCLEAN HOTUNG v. HILLHEAD LTD

    Citation
    SEAN ERIC MCLEAN HOTUNG v. HILLHEAD LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP2820/2002

    Master de Souza found the Plaintiff lacked the true figures and was prejudiced in negotiating the compromise; although evidence did not establish deliberate concealment by OLN, the Plaintiff's disadvantaged position justified reopening Part I of the bill under the authority of Wong Tak-sing; therefore that part of the compromise was set aside and re-taxation and costs of the review were ordered.

  • 2 Dec 2008

    SEAN ERIC MCLEAN HOTUNG v. HILLHEAD LTD

    Citation
    SEAN ERIC MCLEAN HOTUNG v. HILLHEAD LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP4511/2002

    The Master concluded that the plaintiff had been materially disadvantaged because he did not have the true figures for the claimant's profits costs when negotiating the compromise; accordingly that part of the bill was reopened and the compromise set aside for re‑taxation. The court found insufficient evidence of deliberate concealment by OLN but held re‑taxation would not prejudice the 2nd Defendant and allowed the review, awarding the plaintiff the costs of the review against the 2nd Defendant (taxed if not agreed) and a certificate for counsel.

  • 2 Dec 2008

    ERIC EDWARD HOTUNG v. HO YUEN KI AND OTHERS

    Citation
    ERIC EDWARD HOTUNG v. HO YUEN KI AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA571/2003

    The Master concluded that the plaintiff had been materially prejudiced by negotiating without accurate cost figures and, applying the approach in Wong Tak‑sing, allowed that part of the bill to be reopened and the compromise set aside for the profits costs in question; although there was insufficient evidence to establish deliberate concealment by OLN, reopening would not prejudice the 2nd Defendant and was justified; the plaintiff was entitled to costs of the review against the 2nd Defendant, taxed if not agreed, and a certificate for counsel was ordered.