Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Wrongful detention

Legal area

Court

8 Aug 2025

RASHID ZAFAR GHORI v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE sued for and on behalf of DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1313
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2590/2022

Coleman J's prior habeas corpus decision was a final judgment on the lawfulness of the plaintiff's detention for the relevant period and therefore gives rise to issue estoppel precluding the plaintiff from litigating the same unlawful detention claim for 5 August 2021 to 30 June 2022; the degrading treatment claim is demurrable because the BORO does not create an independent cause of action and, in any event, the factual allegations were not proved on the evidence; consequently the action is dismissed with costs.
31 Dec 2024

I PIPE TECHNOLOGIES & ENGINEERING LTD v. KWAN ON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3722
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA784/2023

Although there was no contemporaneous documentary proof of overpayment or an express set‑off agreement, the overpayment issue will be litigated in HCA 1030/2023 and equitable considerations and the close relationship between I‑Pipe and Multipipe made it convenient and just to try the related issues together; accordingly the Defendant was granted conditional leave to defend the summary judgment provided the full contested sum of HKD 8,038,000 be paid into Court; amendment and consolidation were allowed; late applications to admit new evidence were dismissed as unnecessary and inadequately expl…
31 Dec 2024

MULTIPIPE RENOVATION LTD v. KWAN ON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3722
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1030/2023

The Defendant lacked contemporaneous documentary evidence to establish the alleged overpayment or an oral set-off sufficient to defeat summary judgment; however, because the overpayment issue will be the subject of a live trial in the related action (HCA1030/2023) and given the close commercial relationship between I-Pipe and Multipipe, the court exercised discretion to grant conditional leave to defend the summary judgment sum on payment of the full HK$8,038,000 into court; amendment to plead wrongful detention and consolidation of the two actions were allowed; late applications to adduce ne…
24 Mar 2016

SNE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. CHIM KEE MACHINERY CO LTD

Citation

SNE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. CHIM KEE MACHINERY CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2025/2012

The court held the General Conditions (including the 30‑day payment term) formed part of the MHA, there was no unequivocal waiver by Chim Kee and the Tripartite Rental Arrangement did not vary SNE’s primary payment obligations; accordingly Chim Kee validly exercised its contractual right under Clause 5(b) to terminate on 3 July 2012. Consequently SNE’s principal contract claims failed, the palm‑print overpayment methodology was unreliable and SNE’s post‑termination contractual implied‑term claim could not operate after lawful termination; Chim Kee’s counterclaim for unpaid hire and storage wa…
14 Nov 2014

SHAHZAD SALEEM v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE sued for and on behalf of DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

SHAHZAD SALEEM v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE sued for and on behalf of DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1875/2011

The statements of claim were not clearly and obviously without reasonable cause of action and therefore not liable to be struck out; the proposed amendments to plead breaches of the Hardial Singh principles arise out of the same or substantially the same facts already in issue (and the Director's defence had already raised those factual matters), and it was just to grant leave to amend subject to directions and costs; accordingly leave to amend was granted and the Director's strike out summonses dismissed.
17 Jan 2012

LAM ROGERIO SOU FUNG v. TAN SOON GIN GEORGE

Citation

LAM ROGERIO SOU FUNG v. TAN SOON GIN GEORGE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV85/2011

The Court allowed the cross-appeal in part: it awarded interest on the assessed conversion damages for the three sold items from the auction date at 1% above prime until judgment and judgment rate thereafter (but refused interest on the nominal HK$100), inferred on available evidence that both the Stemcup and Double Gourd were damaged while in Tan's possession, and awarded conservative diminution-in-value damages of HK$2,800,000 for the Stemcup and HK$9,000,000 for the Double Gourd (based on discounted earlier photograph-based valuations), with interest on those sums from the auction date; co…
21 Oct 2011

SAEED MUHAMMAD otherwise known as MOHAMMED SAID v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE sued for and on behalf of DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

SAEED MUHAMMAD otherwise known as MOHAMMED SAID v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE sued for and on behalf of DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1717/2010

The court concluded that section 11 of the HKBORO excepts immigration legislation from the HKBOR so the plaintiff could not rely on Art.5(1) HKBOR to impugn detention under section 32; accordingly the claim for unlawful detention was dismissed. The court further held that, had section 11 not applied, detention under section 32(2A) would have been unlawful for lack of certain and accessible grounds, and on that hypothetical basis the claimant would have been entitled to ordinary damages of HK$10,000.
12 May 2010

GHIM LI GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL LTD v. WAH HUNG INTERNATIONAL (CHINA HONG KONG) TRANSPORTATION LTD

Citation

GHIM LI GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL LTD v. WAH HUNG INTERNATIONAL (CHINA HONG KONG) TRANSPORTATION LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2257/2009

The Court found Wah Hung had validly delivered invoices, Ghim Li breached the contract by failing to pay monthly statements within 30 days, Wah Hung was entitled to treat the contract as discharged and to exercise a general lien over Ghim Li's goods; the wrongful delivery to Cambodia was not Wah Hung's fault; accordingly Ghim Li's claims for consequential losses were dismissed and judgment entered for Wah Hung on its counterclaim in the net sum of HK$250,698.40 with HK$60,000 returned to Ghim Li; costs to follow the event with specified exception.
28 Mar 2007

SKYCHANCES INDUSTRIAL LTD v. WINSOURCE INDUSTRIES LTD

Citation

SKYCHANCES INDUSTRIAL LTD v. WINSOURCE INDUSTRIES LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1721/2005

The written Mould Agreements identified Dongguan Main and C & K as the contracting parties; the Plaintiff failed to prove an agency relationship by clear, particularised evidence and relied on late, unreliable parol evidence; accordingly the Defendant was not a party and is not liable to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff has no proven lien rights over certain moulds, and both the Plaintiff's claim and the Defendant's counterclaim must be dismissed.
20 Dec 1985

THE KA WAH BANK LIMITED v. D.W.J. OOSTERVELD

Citation

THE KA WAH BANK LIMITED v. D.W.J. OOSTERVELD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB378/1985

The application to set aside the bankruptcy notice was dismissed because the judgment debtor failed to demonstrate a genuine triable claim; the alleged counterclaim was unrealistic, unsupported by evidence and did not qualify as an enforceable action sufficient to defeat the bankruptcy notice; accordingly the notice stands and the court ordered costs and a conditional declaration of act of bankruptcy if the debt is not paid within seven days.