Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Summary judgment (order 14)

Legal area

Court

30 Mar 2026

FASCO INTERNATIONAL LTD v. FIRECORE TECHNOLOGY LTD

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1814
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2286/2024

Plaintiffs established a prima facie sustainable case by showing purchase orders in their names, payments from their bank accounts and contemporaneous communications evidencing agreement and offsets; defendant failed to particularise or adduce credible evidence of triable issues as to identity or authority (its assertion that it contracted with a non-existent TW entity or an unrelated HK entity was implausible); accordingly summary judgment was entered for plaintiffs and defendant's security for costs application dismissed.
12 Feb 2026

CHUGAI PHARMA USA, INC. v. CHENG YAN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCA 221
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV55/2025

The judge correctly concluded the appellant's pleaded case and affidavit evidence were not capable of belief given material inconsistencies, lack of contemporaneous documents linking the parties and transfers, and unanswered material queries; therefore there was no real prospect of a triable defence and summary judgment ordering return of the funds and declaring trusts was properly entered and should be affirmed.
8 Dec 2025

YIELD SAIL LTD v. LAND MASTER SURVEYORS LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1998
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ579/2023

The court refused leave to appeal out of time and refused leave to appeal against the substantive dismissal because the plaintiff failed to show reasonable diligence in procuring the fresh evidence (Tim) and the intended grounds lacked a reasonable prospect of success; consequently the amendment summons and application for stay were dismissed and costs were awarded against the plaintiff.
29 Sept 2025

JIANGSU SHAGANG MATERIALS TRADING CO., LTD v. DAILY-TECH HONGKONG CO., LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4377
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1093/2022

Defendant failed to establish any bona fide triable issue: contemporaneous documents evidenced Defendant's request or acquiescence to the Guarantee giving rise to a presumption of indemnity which Defendant did not credibly rebut; there was no evidence Defendant was not liable to Global; clause 3(a)(ii) ceased to operate upon Global's Notice of Termination (confirmed by email) so Plaintiff's claim was not premature; accordingly summary judgment was appropriate and judgment entered for Plaintiff for HK$401,185,002.95 plus interest and costs nisi.
29 Aug 2025

LI LI HONG v. CHEN DI AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3885
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2091/2024

Summary judgment was refused because defendants raised triable issues (notably arguable common/unilateral mistake and potential discharge of surety by plaintiff's conduct) making Order 14 inappropriate; continuation and post-judgment Mareva relief were set aside because plaintiff failed to demonstrate the requisite objective real risk of unjustified dissipation and the ex parte procedure lacked adequate justification and full and frank disclosure; D1's contention he was not a party to the Guarantee was rejected on the documentary evidence showing he signed as guarantor.
19 May 2025

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (HONG KONG) LTD 對 HUI KAM SHING

Citation

[2025] HKDC 817
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4366/2022

The court refused the extension of time because the delay (approx. eight weeks) combined with the lack of a arguable appeal meant no sufficient cause to extend; fresh evidence was rejected because the defendant failed Ladd v Marshall's first limb (he could have obtained and filed the material earlier) and the proffered evidence was neither clearly credible nor likely to change the result; on the merits the defendant had no real or bona fide defence to the summary judgment claim because the bank's monthly statements and the conclusive evidence clause established the indebtedness absent any obv…
10 Jan 2025

CHUGAI PHARMA USA, INC. v. CHENG YAN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 251
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1326/2023

The 1st Defendant's account that the Hong Kong receipts were repayments of a December 2021 loan was materially inconsistent with her pleadings, unsupported by contemporaneous evidence, and inherently implausible given the timing and character of the transfers; therefore her defence was not capable of belief, there was no real or bona fide defence on the pleadings, and summary judgment was correctly entered for the Plaintiff with declaration of constructive/resulting trust and consequential relief.
17 Dec 2024

SU CHUN YAN v. TRENDZON HOLDINGS GROUP LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3611
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA92/2024

Affirmation of Yao admitted because it responded to material first raised shortly before the original hearing and the defendant was under time pressure; the Defendant established a bona fide triable defence that the Agreement and related instruments were forged and executed without the company's authority and therefore the Master’s conditional payment order (based largely on the cheque cause of action) was unjustified; consequently the appeal is allowed, the conditional order set aside, unconditional leave to defend granted and the funds paid into court released to the Defendant subject to th…
27 Nov 2024

QIAN FEIYI v. FIRST PRESTIGE INC AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3415
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA149/2024

The court dismissed the appeal and upheld summary judgment because the defendants failed to raise any credible triable issue. The formal Loan Agreement, multiple extension agreements, acknowledgements and contemporaneous communications consistently evidenced a genuine loan and guarantee. Allegations of a sham trust, non‑compliance with drawdown formalities, PRC exchange control concerns, or execution formalities were unsupported by specific or credible evidence and did not prevent enforcement; variations in drawdown were consensual and clause 8.3 did not absolve liability. Accordingly summary…
2 Sept 2024

TSO MAN KUEN JASMINE v. POON CHUK HUNG

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1467
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1379/2023

Dismiss application for summary judgment and interim payment because Plaintiff failed to comply with mandatory affidavit/verification requirements of Order 14 r2(1), sought relief based on allegations (fraud/money laundering) not pleaded in the statement of claim, and factual disputes exist that require trial; Plaintiff also failed to meet the high test for interim payment under Order 29 r11(1)(c).