Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Unconscionable contracts ordinance

Legal area

Court

29 Jul 2024

CMB WING LUNG BANK LTD v. LAM MAT CHUEN

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1956
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2000/2023

Defendant created unauthorised subsequent charges in breach of the mortgage which constituted Events of Default permitting the bank to call in the loan and seek possession; the Facility Letter expressly permitted variation of terms with notice and the bank's evidential material under Order 88 was sufficient; the defendant's late, unparticularised UCO challenge lacked evidential foundation and did not raise a triable issue, therefore judgment for the bank was proper.
4 Aug 2022

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. LOK SHEK HUNG

Citation

[2022] HKDC 805
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1903/2021

Defendant failed to demonstrate any real or bona fide defence or triable issue: the card agreements expressly authorised the interest rates and the order of application of payments, no vitiating circumstances or credible evidence of unconscionability under the UCO or breach of SSO or binding effect of FCA/Code were shown, and thus the Master’s orders (summary judgment for plaintiff, set aside of default judgment and striking out of counterclaim) were correct and the appeal is dismissed.
12 Dec 2001

CHEKIANG FIRST BANK LTD. v. NG CHUN HING BENJAMIN

Citation

CHEKIANG FIRST BANK LTD. v. NG CHUN HING BENJAMIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3473/2000

Defendant failed to demonstrate a defence with a real prospect of success: his misrepresentation allegations were inconsistent, unparticularised and implausible; the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance did not apply to the 1994 guarantee and in any event the facts did not establish unconscionability; accordingly the default judgment should stand and Master Mary Yuens partial set-aside was reversed and the judgment sum varied to reflect subsequent payments.
16 Jul 2001

LIU CHONG HING BANK LTD. v. ALLAN WONG AND OTHERS

Citation

LIU CHONG HING BANK LTD. v. ALLAN WONG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA11040/1999

The Court found no operative misrepresentation or estoppel: the defendants knew or ought to have known they were signing a binding continuing unlimited guarantee; any assurances given were non‑binding statements about likelihood of enforcement while securities exceeded loans and did not negate contractual liability; statutory protection did not apply to a 1993 contract; therefore plaintiff entitled to judgment for the claimed sum with interest and costs.
10 Jul 2000

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE

Citation

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA14635/1999

The indemnity cost provisions in the credit card agreements are unconscionable within the meaning and purpose of the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance given the unequal bargaining position, lack of notice or understanding by consumers, and the clauses' capacity to permit uncapped and unreasonable charges; therefore the provisions are unenforceable and plaintiffs are limited to the fixed costs under Order 62; the master's order granting fixed costs is upheld and the appeals are dismissed.
10 Jul 2000

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE

Citation

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA15044/1999

The indemnity cost provisions in the credit card agreements were unconscionable under the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance given the unequal bargaining positions, lack of notice, the extraordinarily wide uncapped scope permitting unreasonable third party and administrative charges and the context of high interest rates; accordingly the clauses were unenforceable and the plaintiffs were limited to fixed costs as provided by Order 62.
10 Jul 2000

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE

Citation

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA14986/1999

The indemnity cost provision in the credit card agreements was unconscionable under the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance given standard form drafting, unequal bargaining power, lack of notice, and the clause's potential for unbounded and unreasonable costs; therefore it was unenforceable and the plaintiffs were limited to fixed costs as provided by Order 62; the appeal was dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

CMB WING LUNG BANK LTD v. LAM MAT CHUEN

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. LOK SHEK HUNG

CHEKIANG FIRST BANK LTD. v. NG CHUN HING BENJAMIN

LIU CHONG HING BANK LTD. v. ALLAN WONG AND OTHERS

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE

HANG SENG CREDIT CARD LTD. v. TSANG NGA LEE