Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Accounting by trustees

Legal area

Court

11 Aug 2022

TRINITY CONCEPT LTD (In liquidation) v. WONG KUNG SANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1180
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP221/2022

The Court held the beneficiaries (the company in liquidation) are entitled as of right to a first-stage account and that, on the pleaded facts and given the absence of documentary evidence (partly attributed to the defendants’ conduct), it was premature to strike out claims for further relief as time-barred under s.20(2); limitation issues could be reserved until after the account is taken, so the strike-out and Order 14A applications were properly dismissed and leave to appeal refused.
3 Mar 2008

許尊明 v. 歐振清

Citation

許尊明 v. 歐振清
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5396/2005

Defendants admitted holding the account funds on trust but failed to produce satisfactory evidence to rebut the plaintiff's calculations or to justify claimed deductions or reserves; the plaintiff had not agreed to any reserve fund or majority management, therefore the plaintiff was entitled to the claimed sums and interest and costs on an indemnity basis.
3 Mar 2008

許尊明 v. 歐振清

Citation

許尊明 v. 歐振清
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6235/2005

There was no evidence Mr. Hui agreed to any reserve or to be bound by majority resolutions, the defendants admitted holding the Account on trust but failed to rebut or account for the plaintiff's calculations, therefore the plaintiff was entitled to judgment for his computed shares ($45,000 and $38,686.53) with interest and indemnity costs.
3 Mar 2008

許尊明 v. 歐振清及另一人

Citation

許尊明 v. 歐振清及另一人
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6238/2005

The defendants failed to show that the plaintiff had agreed to any reserve or that they were entitled to the deductions claimed; the funds in the account were held on trust for all co-owners and the defendants did not discharge their duty to account or to justify deductions, therefore the plaintiff is entitled to his one-fifth share of the specified rents ($45,000) and one-fifth of the account balance as at 28 February 2005 ($38,686.53), with interest and costs on an indemnity basis.
3 Mar 2008

許尊明 v. 歐振清

Citation

許尊明 v. 歐振清
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6094/2005

Plaintiff did not consent to any reserve fund; defendants admitted holding funds on trust but failed to provide satisfactory evidence to rebut plaintiff's calculations or justify claimed deductions; therefore plaintiff entitled to the claimed sums and defendants must account, entitling plaintiff to judgment for the specified amounts with interest and costs on an indemnity basis.
27 Oct 2006

MAN PING NAM AND ANOTHER v. MAN FONG HANG

Citation

MAN PING NAM AND ANOTHER v. MAN FONG HANG
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV5/2006

The plaintiff failed to prove that the managers' conduct caused any loss; the subsale price to a developer conditioned on vacant possession and on governmental approvals was not a reliable indicator of the market value of a sale without vacant possession; the judge's use of a notional 10% deduction and reliance on rejected valuation comparables was arbitrary and unsustainable; accordingly the award of equitable compensation was set aside, while orders requiring proper accounting for proceeds remain.

Hong Kong Case Law

TRINITY CONCEPT LTD (In liquidation) v. WONG KUNG SANG AND ANOTHER

許尊明 v. 歐振清

許尊明 v. 歐振清

許尊明 v. 歐振清及另一人

許尊明 v. 歐振清

MAN PING NAM AND ANOTHER v. MAN FONG HANG