Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Slander of title

Legal area

Court

18 Mar 2025

LAM CHUNG PING AND OTHERS v. CHAN YUET KUEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKDC 476
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2203/2023

The prayer for "damages on slander on title" in the Amended Statement of Claim is struck out because the pleading failed to plead malice or particulars of malice, thereby disclosing no reasonable cause of action and risking prejudice, embarrassment and delay; the court lawfully exercised its power under Order 18 r19(1) (and alternatively its case management power under Order 1B r1(2)(j)) to strike out that relief sua sponte, while preserving the plaintiffs' right to seek removal of the registered Form A by exercise of the court's inherent jurisdiction.
12 Apr 2024

美力高財務有限公司對黃港香

Citation

[2024] HKDC 572
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3063/2022

The appeal is allowed because there are triable and material disputes of fact and law—notably whether the defendant actually received HKD600,000 or only HKD480,000 (supported by bank records) and whether the alleged HKD120,000 administrative deduction and resulting effective interest rate render the loan agreement unlawful—such disputes cannot properly be resolved on a summary judgment or by conditional leave with a deposit; the hearing officer's conditional order is therefore set aside and summary judgment, conditional leave to defend and interim payment are refused; costs to follow the appe…
10 Nov 2016

CHANG KING TO v. WONG SHUEN YUK

Citation

CHANG KING TO v. WONG SHUEN YUK
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2518/2015

The amended statement of claim was properly struck out and the action dismissed because the pleaded causes of action were either obviously unsustainable or constituted an abuse of process by raising matters that should have been litigated earlier; the strike out test requires impossibility of success and a balancing of public and private interests.
5 Sept 2014

CHAN YAU v. CHAN CALVIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHAN YAU v. CHAN CALVIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA666/2007

Although the court found on fact that the parties had agreed the joint development continued to apply to Lot 660E1, the agreements were unenforceable because performance necessarily required the 2nd defendant to make a false statutory declaration as to sole ownership understood by the Government as inclusive of beneficial ownership; the plaintiff participated with knowledge and was in pari delicto and therefore cannot recover in restitution; the 2nd defendant's slander of title claim failed but the lis pendens registration must be vacated.
17 Jun 2010

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1517/2005

The court allowed only the amendment pleading illegality of the Ting Agreements (false declarations re beneficial ownership and self-use) but refused amendments that impeached the completed sales or sought to impose a condition precedent to sale, and refused the proposed implied 3-year completion term as too vague; directions and costs orders were given accordingly.
4 Apr 2007

TAI YIP DYEING FACTORY LTD (In Liquidation) v. KONG HOI SANG

Citation

TAI YIP DYEING FACTORY LTD (In Liquidation) v. KONG HOI SANG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2917/2004

The court found plaintiff proved slander of title but only nominal damages were recoverable; weighing the parties' conduct (notably the defendant's malicious falsehood) and exercising the court's broad discretionary powers on costs, the judge concluded both parties were partly successful and ordered no costs for the trial (each party to bear their own trial costs), while confirming Tai Yip's agreed entitlement to costs up to and including 23 December 2004 to be taxed party and party on the District Court scale; the defendant's application for costs was dismissed, and any costs to which the de…
21 Feb 2007

TAI YIP DYEING FACTORY LTD v. KONG HOI SANG

Citation

TAI YIP DYEING FACTORY LTD v. KONG HOI SANG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2917/2004

An attempted registration of a writ as lis pendens that falsely asserts a proprietary interest can constitute slander of title if published maliciously; malice requires knowledge of falsity or recklessness and an asserted defence of solicitor advice must be proven; on these facts defendant acted maliciously because no evidence substantiated legal advice, but plaintiff failed to prove the attempted registration caused the claimed monetary loss and mitigation resulted in no recoverable loss, entitling plaintiff only to nominal damages and costs.
9 May 2005

FIRST GOOD INTERNATIONAL LTD v. SHUM KIN AND OTHERS

Citation

FIRST GOOD INTERNATIONAL LTD v. SHUM KIN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA614/2004

Master was correct to strike out the original deficient pleading because material facts supporting agency and the claim for wrongful registration were not properly pleaded; however the court grants leave to amend because the agency, slander of title and conspiracy claims are arguable, arise from substantially the same facts, and the court should exercise discretion under Order 20 r 5(5) to allow amendments despite limitation; leave to file the 2nd affirmation is granted as relevant evidence.
3 May 1996

TANG YAU YI TONG AND ANOTHER v. TANG MOU SHAU TSO AND OTHERS

Citation

TANG YAU YI TONG AND ANOTHER v. TANG MOU SHAU TSO AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV138/1995

On the evidence the Court held that contributions and conduct established that the Tang Mou Shau Tso members had acquired a beneficial interest in the Tai Po ancestral hall land; a tso may join or buy into a tong where justified by customary practice and identical membership; therefore the manager of the Tong was not entitled to sell the property without the consent of the personal defendants as members of the Tso (and the appeal was allowed and declaratory and party-amendment orders made).
3 Feb 1994

AMUSE HONG KONG LTD. v. CHAN KIN TIM, LESLIE AND ANOTHER

Citation

AMUSE HONG KONG LTD. v. CHAN KIN TIM, LESLIE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV216/1993

The appeal is dismissed because the letter contained a false and malicious allegation that KML's copyright claim was 'spurious and without foundation', the defendant did not demonstrate a viable plea of justification (the avoidance letter did not effect an immediate rescission that defeated justification), and the balance of convenience favored preserving the contractual/status quo and plaintiffs' royalty interests by granting the mandatory retraction and negative interlocutory injunction pending trial.