Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Summary judgment (order 14 rhc)

Legal area

Court

16 Apr 2021

TANG YUAN YI v. TOKYO INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 944
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2078/2018

The Court dismissed the defendant's appeal and affirmed summary judgment for the plaintiff on USD160,000 because the plaintiff established entitlement to restitution for payments made under a mistake, the defendant failed to raise any credible or triable defence (agency, repayment or change of position lacked probative evidence), and the fraud exception did not apply as no allegation of fraud or dishonesty was made against the defendant and the unjust enrichment claim could be maintained without proving fraud.
28 Jan 2014

王秉岐 v. LEE CHEE HO, JULEUS

Citation

王秉岐 v. LEE CHEE HO, JULEUS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA186/2010

The court struck out the RRADC because it disclosed no reasonable defence: the defendant had admitted on multiple occasions that the transfers could be effected without the alleged Necessary Documents, the so‑called document defects and C&P lien did not prevent performance, and the late‑raised 3% share issue was a dilatory tactic rather than a bona fide defence; accordingly summary judgment was unnecessary but would likewise have been appropriate; plaintiff awarded judgment with damages to be assessed and costs.
30 Aug 2007

THE HONG KONG MORTGAGE CORPORATION LTD v. TSOI SIU CHING LEO

Citation

THE HONG KONG MORTGAGE CORPORATION LTD v. TSOI SIU CHING LEO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1653/2006

There was no real or triable defence: the defendant produced no document or credible evidence of any undertaking that limited the written second mortgage and the parol evidence rule precluded the collateral limitation alleged; therefore the assignee (plaintiff) was entitled to summary judgment for the outstanding debt, interest and costs.
11 Apr 2006

TADANO SOUTH CHINA CO. LTD. v. BRIGHTFORD LTD. AND ANOTHER

Citation

TADANO SOUTH CHINA CO. LTD. v. BRIGHTFORD LTD. AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA9630/1999

The Master’s summary judgment was set aside because material triable issues and late evidence required further scrutiny; conditional leave to defend was granted on the basis that Mr Lam must pay into court the current HKD equivalent of JP 42,560,000 (as determined by HSBC mid‑market rate on the date of judgment) within 30 days or provide security to the satisfaction of a Master; this protects the plaintiff's recovery while allowing resolution of factual disputes at trial.
18 Jun 2004

THE GENERAL OF THE SALVATION ARMY v. HONG KONG CAT SALVATION ARMY LTD t/a HONG KONG CAT SALVATION ARMY

Citation

THE GENERAL OF THE SALVATION ARMY v. HONG KONG CAT SALVATION ARMY LTD t/a HONG KONG CAT SALVATION ARMY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV288/2003

The Court upheld the judge's factual assessment that the materials before him raised triable issues on misrepresentation and damage; the three alleged instances of confusion were insufficient and possibly attributable to hearsay or editorial error, mere similarity of names was not enough to warrant summary judgment, and therefore refusal of summary judgment and granting of leave to defend was correct and will not be disturbed on appeal.

Hong Kong Case Law

TANG YUAN YI v. TOKYO INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LTD

王秉岐 v. LEE CHEE HO, JULEUS

THE HONG KONG MORTGAGE CORPORATION LTD v. TSOI SIU CHING LEO

TADANO SOUTH CHINA CO. LTD. v. BRIGHTFORD LTD. AND ANOTHER

THE GENERAL OF THE SALVATION ARMY v. HONG KONG CAT SALVATION ARMY LTD t/a HONG KONG CAT SALVATION ARMY