Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Setting aside default judgment

Legal area

Court

27 Apr 2026

FUNG SUK YEE v. CHAN SHING YAN TRADING AS WONDER EDUCATION INVESTMENT CONSULTING CO

Citation

[2026] HKDC 744
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6554/2024

The court refused the fresh evidence application because the plaintiff failed all three Ladd v Marshall requirements (no reasonable effort to produce the material at first instance, the materials would not have had a substantial impact on the outcome, and they lacked prima facie credibility). The default judgment was held to be regularly obtained and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success or adduce an admissible affidavit of merits; accordingly both the application to admit fresh evidence and the appeal to set aside the judgment were dismissed and costs were ordered (c…
14 Apr 2026

SERES PROPERTIES B.V. v. LEE HOCK PUN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2102
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1287/2022

The Consent Order did not exclusively prevent D1 from seeking to set aside the Default Judgment by other routes; the Default Judgment was irregular and therefore properly set aside ex debito justitiae; there was no abuse of process or such delay as to justify a different result; variation to order immediate summary assessment was refused because procedural preconditions were not met; both the Leave Summons and Variation Summons were dismissed and Plaintiff ordered to pay HK$42,000 to the 1st Defendant as summarily assessed costs of the summonses.
17 Mar 2026

MAXCOLM FINANCE LTD v. CHAN CHIN HUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKDC 472
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP3829/2025

The Order was set aside because both defendants had died before commencement of proceedings; without a carry on order the originating summons could not be validly served on their estates under Order 15 r 6A(3), rendering the default judgment irregular and justifying setting it aside with no order as to costs.
30 Dec 2025

YAU NGAI v. ITALINA (HOLDINGS) LTD

Citation

[2025] HKLdT 77
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDPE936/2024

Where a defendant’s meritorious defence was disclosed on 14.2.2025 the tribunal applied the principle that costs occasioned by further resistance after disclosure should follow the event and varied the costs nisi accordingly: costs of the setting aside application incurred up to 14.2.2025 to the applicant; costs incurred on or after 15.2.2025 to the respondent; costs in the cause and issue-based deprivation of the respondent’s costs were rejected absent a significant increase in costs or special circumstances; the respondent’s assessed costs were reduced by 15% on a broad-brush set-off to ref…
16 Dec 2025

LAM YIN v. LIU PING

Citation

[2025] HKDC 2063
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1034/2023

The defendant demonstrated a real prospect of success on the penalty point such that the threshold for setting aside a regularly obtained default judgment was met; accordingly the court set aside the default judgment and extended time for appeal, but exercised its discretion to grant relief on terms requiring the defendant to pay HK$200,000 into court as security within 42 days to protect the plaintiff from prejudice.
11 Nov 2025

LING WAI LUN v. NORDIC WAY LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1916
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4490/2024

The appeal was dismissed because (1) there was affirmative evidence that the AOS form was served and no evidence to the contrary; (2) the over-award of interest was rectified by amendment of the judgment and there is no appeal against that amendment; and (3) the Defendant failed to demonstrate a defence with a real prospect of success — the documentary evidence did not prove ownership or transfer of the alleged USDT or that the e-address belonged to the claimant, so the primary merits threshold for setting aside a regular default judgment was not met; accordingly the Default Judgment stood an…
30 Sept 2025

ZHAN YIFENG v. PANG KA SHING

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4554
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1947/2023

The Default Judgment was set aside because the court found a real prospect of success on the defendant’s defences (duress, sham/no genuine transaction and illegality in respect of part of the loan) but, having regard to the defendant’s failure to comply with disclosure orders and other procedural conduct, it was appropriate to impose a conditional payment into court to ensure proper future conduct; the court therefore allowed the appeal, varied the Master’s Order by setting aside the Default Judgment subject to specified payment and procedural conditions and ordered the defendant to file a de…
5 Sept 2025

LAU TAK LUN AND ANOTHER v. HO KA YAN

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1529
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ7604/2024

Adopting Harbour Hero, the court held the defendant's merits were disclosed by the defendant's first affirmation dated 26 February 2025, therefore the plaintiffs recover costs incurred up to that date (including perusal); costs of resisting the setting aside application thereafter, including the 7 July 2025 hearing, are to be borne by the plaintiffs.
22 Aug 2025

SUN LI v. YU ZHIFENG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4679
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1845/2023

The stay application was dismissed as misconceived because the applicant failed to apply first to the Master who made the substantive order and no special circumstances justified departure; the interim-interim proprietary/Mareva injunctions were refused for lack of extreme urgency, unjustified delay, and absence of cogent evidence of risk of dissipation given the claimant's essentially monetary claim.
24 Apr 2025

CHAN SAU HA v. LEUNG ON YU

Citation

[2025] HKDC 676
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1493/2023

Default judgment was regular; contemporaneous WhatsApp records and inconsistent, inherently implausible affirmations demonstrate the transfer was a loan and the defendant's account lacks a realistic prospect of success; accordingly the Master's order setting aside the default judgment is set aside and the plaintiff's appeal is allowed.