Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Validity of demand

Legal area

Court

2 Apr 2020

WEST KOWLOON CULTURAL DISTRICT AUTHORITY v. AIG INSURANCE HONG KONG LTD

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 569
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2039/2018

The 1st Demand complied with Clause 2 of the Bond because it was written, expressed the Plaintiff's opinion that the Contractor was or had been in default, and identified the amount claimed (the bonded sum) as in respect of damages, losses etc caused by the default; references to future losses were surplusage. The Defendant failed to adduce particularly cogent evidence of fraud such that the fraud exception applied. Summary judgment for the Plaintiff for the full bonded sum with interest was therefore appropriate.
21 Apr 1999

DRAGAGES ET TRAVAUX PUBLICS (HK) LTD. v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CO.

Citation

DRAGAGES ET TRAVAUX PUBLICS (HK) LTD. v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CO.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT5/1999

The defendant is entitled to rely on the contention that the bond had expired (complete performance) so the demand was not made during the bond's validity; that contention raises a factual dispute precluding summary determination under Order 14A. Consequently the application to strike out the defence was refused except insofar as the allegation about authorised signatories was struck out.
14 Jan 1997

BANK OF CREDIT AND COMMERCE HONG KONG LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v. ALLEN DALE KELLER alias DALE KELLER AND ANOTHER

Citation

BANK OF CREDIT AND COMMERCE HONG KONG LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v. ALLEN DALE KELLER alias DALE KELLER AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7897/1996

Defendants raised several issues which on the face of the evidence constituted arguable defences (including improper application of guarantor funds, questions over the validity of the demand and defective account, and challenge to recovery costs); those issues could not be resolved on an Order 14 summary judgment application and therefore unconditional leave to defend must be granted.
7 May 1983

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHU FAI HUNG NICHOLAS

Citation

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHU FAI HUNG NICHOLAS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA12415/1982

The guarantee's wording created a personal, on-demand obligation by the guarantor to cause payment to the bank; the demand letters were valid and the plaintiff produced cogent evidence that the defendant had removed assets/would be absent so as to justify the Order 44A proceedings; consequently the defendant's summons to discharge the warrant was dismissed and leave to defend was granted only on condition that the full claim amount be paid into court within the specified time.

Hong Kong Case Law

WEST KOWLOON CULTURAL DISTRICT AUTHORITY v. AIG INSURANCE HONG KONG LTD

DRAGAGES ET TRAVAUX PUBLICS (HK) LTD. v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CO.

BANK OF CREDIT AND COMMERCE HONG KONG LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v. ALLEN DALE KELLER alias DALE KELLER AND ANOTHER

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHU FAI HUNG NICHOLAS