Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Advance payments

Legal area

Court

4 Mar 2021

TABASSAM RAHEEM v. CHUN HUNG ENGINEERING LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKDC 271
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC2554/2019

With interlocutory judgment on liability entered, the court may order an interim payment under Order 29 r11(1)(b); on the evidence the applicant is likely to recover section 9 compensation of $37,843.20, advance payments were made under s10 and are not deductible from s9, and a reasonable proportion as interim payment is $25,000; costs to applicant ordered nisi to be assessed summarily.
18 Nov 2015

CHAN KAM HUNG v. SIU FAI LAM t/a UNIVERSAL ASIA CONSULTANT CO

Citation

CHAN KAM HUNG v. SIU FAI LAM t/a UNIVERSAL ASIA CONSULTANT CO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1640/2013

Judge found plaintiff credible and proved the four agreements and that $1,878,170 comprised trust deposits and advance payments for services not rendered; defendant was unjustly enriched and in breach of contract; therefore restitution for $1,878,170 with interest and costs was due and the defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.
6 Dec 2012

NEWELL CURTAIN WALL & ENGINEERING CO LTD v. SUNYARDS ENGINEERING LTD

Citation

NEWELL CURTAIN WALL & ENGINEERING CO LTD v. SUNYARDS ENGINEERING LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT55/2010

Clause 6 of the Letter of Acceptance constituted a condition precedent: the subcontract did not become effective until mock-up approval by the Architect and Po Lin Monastery. No such approval was given because the mock-ups and required tests did not comply with contractual and Building Department requirements; the defendant was principally at fault for failing to prepare adequate fabrication shop drawings, to undertake required testing and to maintain quality control. Consequently the subcontract never took effect and the plaintiff is entitled to restitution of advance payments. Judgment ente…
4 Feb 2008

WONG CHI KONG BENNY t/a SAI HING CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO v. TSANG KWONG KEUNG

Citation

WONG CHI KONG BENNY t/a SAI HING CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO v. TSANG KWONG KEUNG
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1226/2006

The application to set aside the default judgment and the absolute charging order was allowed because the defendant demonstrated at least a real prospect of success on the merits given the disputed final account and the possibility that a net balance is payable to him; accordingly the judge exercised his discretion to set aside the orders and granted leave to defend without imposing conditions, while awarding costs to the plaintiff.
10 Jun 1999

NG YAT CHI v. MAX SHARE LTD. AND ANOTHER

Citation

NG YAT CHI v. MAX SHARE LTD. AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW321/1996

The court applied the standard disclosure tests (existence, relevance, possession) and granted discovery only where a real and direct connection to contested issues was established (eg documents linking CRC loan specifically to Hennessy Road, share transfer instruments and accounting records substantiating payments, and accounting records showing crediting and utilisation of advances). Requests that were irrelevant, merely temporal coincidences, duplicative of existing audited accounts or oppressive (eg wholesale bank statements) were refused. Costs of the summonses were ordered to be costs i…

Hong Kong Case Law

TABASSAM RAHEEM v. CHUN HUNG ENGINEERING LTD AND ANOTHER

CHAN KAM HUNG v. SIU FAI LAM t/a UNIVERSAL ASIA CONSULTANT CO

NEWELL CURTAIN WALL & ENGINEERING CO LTD v. SUNYARDS ENGINEERING LTD

WONG CHI KONG BENNY t/a SAI HING CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO v. TSANG KWONG KEUNG

NG YAT CHI v. MAX SHARE LTD. AND ANOTHER