Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Turquand rule (indoor management)

Legal area

Court

8 May 2020

AIRSUPPLY INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS GROUP LTD v. TAI SHING TRANSPORT (H.K.) CO LTD

Citation

[2020] HKDC 307
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1202/2018

Defendant failed to show any bona fide defence or triable issue that Mr Chung's authority had been revoked before the Subject Orders; prior completed transactions and the defendant's acquiescence created a continuing representation that Chung had authority; plaintiff had no notice of revocation and was entitled to rely on apparent authority (and Turquand principle); summary judgment for HK$440,000 plus costs was therefore correctly entered and the appeal is dismissed.
27 Nov 2012

CHENG LAI PING ANNIE v. CHUN YU LOGISTICS HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHENG LAI PING ANNIE v. CHUN YU LOGISTICS HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1100/2012

Summary judgment refused and leave to defend granted because there exists a real triable issue whether the loan transaction was genuine and whether the director had authority; the Turquand rule could not be relied upon given the admitted lack of authority and the circumstances that might render the transaction not genuine.
24 Sept 2007

THE BANK OF EAST ASIA, LTD v. LABOUR BUILIDNGS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

THE BANK OF EAST ASIA, LTD v. LABOUR BUILIDNGS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP769/2002

Leave to file the proposed rejoinder was granted because it was necessary to properly plead exceptions to the Turquand rule and to respond to new matters raised in the Reply; the rejoinder did not cause demonstrable prejudice, did not impermissibly repeat matters so as to amount to double pleading on these facts, and the allegation of forgery was a clear plea supported by evidence sufficient to justify allowing it to be pleaded for trial; plaintiff was afforded opportunity to reply by surrejoinder and costs were ordered accordingly.
25 Nov 2004

JETCOM ENTERPRISES LTD v. DRAGON VICTORY TRADING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

JETCOM ENTERPRISES LTD v. DRAGON VICTORY TRADING LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3512/2003

The 2nd defendant had no actual authority and the plaintiff failed to establish ostensible/apparent authority because no representation was shown to have been made by persons with actual authority; the plaintiff was not shown to be ready, willing and able to perform, so specific performance was refused; registrations (the 22 August 2003 document and lis pendens) were ordered vacated; the 2nd defendant breached a warranty of authority but only nominal damages of HK$1 were awarded.
6 Oct 2004

YIP LAI FONG AND ANOTHER v. SIN TUNG HING AND OTHERS

Citation

YIP LAI FONG AND ANOTHER v. SIN TUNG HING AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV116/2003

The court exercised its discretion to make absolute the costs order nisi: 3rd and 4th Respondents pay the 1st Petitioner's costs of the appeal; the Petitioners pay the costs of the 3rd to 5th Respondents of the hearing below (with certificate for two counsel); additional costs consequences from the 2nd Petitioner's abandonment and the appeal against the 5th Respondent to be paid by the relevant petitioner and left for taxation; costs occasioned by the adjournment remitted to Chu J; each party to bear own costs for the 24 September 2004 hearing.
24 Jan 2002

POLYSON JEWELLERY CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. CARLOS LIU SONG

Citation

POLYSON JEWELLERY CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. CARLOS LIU SONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV953/2001

A purchaser is entitled to raise requisitions about alleged defects in the execution and validity of title documents; the vendor must answer satisfactorily. Where execution does not comply with company articles the Turquand rule cannot be invoked to cure the defect. Mere lapse of time or dissolution of a company without detailed surrounding facts is insufficient to establish that the risk of successful litigation is illusory. The defendant failed to show good title and the requisitions were not satisfactorily answered; the court therefore must not compel completion.

Hong Kong Case Law

AIRSUPPLY INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS GROUP LTD v. TAI SHING TRANSPORT (H.K.) CO LTD

CHENG LAI PING ANNIE v. CHUN YU LOGISTICS HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER

THE BANK OF EAST ASIA, LTD v. LABOUR BUILIDNGS LTD AND OTHERS

JETCOM ENTERPRISES LTD v. DRAGON VICTORY TRADING LTD AND OTHERS

YIP LAI FONG AND ANOTHER v. SIN TUNG HING AND OTHERS

POLYSON JEWELLERY CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. CARLOS LIU SONG