Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Annulment

  • 7 Nov 2023

    黃 對 吳前稱吳

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 245
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC2867/2021

    The husband failed to prove the marriage was invalid; his documentary evidence did not establish non‑attendance or invalidity, PRC administrative agencies and courts had rejected his requests to cancel the registration, s20(1) did not provide grounds for annulment and s20A(1) did not assist him given the PRC determinations; accordingly the husband's nullity petition is dismissed and the wife's divorce petition is granted (decree nisi); costs to husband; referral to DOJ for possible prosecution of bigamy.

  • 7 Dec 2021

    RE YIP WAN FUNG

    Citation
    [2021] HKCFI 3610
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB6783/2019

    Application dismissed. Key reasons: on contractual construction the Policy's exclusion requiring a "judgment, or any other final adjudication" must be read in context with cover of defence costs including appeals, such that 'judgment' means a judgment in the nature of final adjudication (the CFA decision), so the petitioner’s claim was within the limitation period; petitioner disclosed direct telephone contact and other service attempts and there was no proved knowledge by petitioner of voicemail or material alternative service route that would make the substituted service order vitiated by m…

  • 8 Jul 2021

    RE CHEUNG HING CHIK also known as CHARLES H.C. CHEUNG, the Debtor

    Citation
    [2021] HKCA 981
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV577/2020

    The Court upheld the judge's discretionary refusal to rescind the bankruptcy order because the bankrupt failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances or a material change justifying overturning the BO and failed to produce credible evidence that funds were available to meet the debts; although s.6D(3) may be considered in a s.98 application (including post-BO facts), the statutory test was not satisfied on the evidence before the court.

  • 31 Oct 2018

    李 對 丘

    Citation
    [2018] HKFC 190
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC6050/2018

    法院認為女方未能圓婚係基於其醫學診斷的性交恐懼及一次月經因素，該情況不構成《婚姻訴訟條例》第IV部第20(2)(b)所指之故意拒絕圓房；男方未能嚴格舉證其主張，呈請被撤銷並須負擔訟費。

  • 16 Mar 2011

    HO YING PAT BOBBY v. OVERSEAS WAY (CHINA) LTD

    Citation
    HO YING PAT BOBBY v. OVERSEAS WAY (CHINA) LTD
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV1/2010

    The Court refused to interfere with the judge's exercise of discretion because the debt was clearly established, procedural requirements were complied with, the stay sought was effectively open‑ended and likely to last years, the Official Receiver had not indicated consent and creditors would be prejudiced; no error of law or principle was shown, so the appeal must be dismissed.

  • 11 Feb 2010

    YEAR HARVEST INVESTMENTS LTD v. LABOUR BUILDINGS LTD

    Citation
    YEAR HARVEST INVESTMENTS LTD v. LABOUR BUILDINGS LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1899/2008

    The court found the Defendant committed repudiatory breaches by failing to deliver the original title deeds before completion and by failing to effect timely transfers of the guesthouse licences; the notice of annulment was ineffective and, on those breaches, summary judgment was entered for the Plaintiff entitling it to return of the deposit with interest and damages to be assessed.

  • 2 May 2006

    BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD v. FU MING KONG MICHAEL

    Citation
    BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD v. FU MING KONG MICHAEL
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB9860/2005

    Because there was an extant judgment debt with no stay of execution, the debtor failed to show a bona fide dispute over the debt or any concrete proposal or means to pay the reduced outstanding balance (approximately HK$3.4 million), the court was obliged to make a bankruptcy order with costs against the debtor.

  • 7 May 2001

    RE: MAK TSZ LOK and EX-PARTE: CALTEX OIL HONG KONG LTD., A JUDGMENT CREDITOR

    Citation
    RE: MAK TSZ LOK and EX-PARTE: CALTEX OIL HONG KONG LTD., A JUDGMENT CREDITOR
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB4397/2000

    Bankruptcy orders were annulled because the petitioner had actual knowledge of the debtors' new address (removal notice and regular statements) yet affirmations misrepresented that the old Shatin address was the last known address and that no other address was available; that misrepresentation meant the court would not have granted leave for filing and substituted service if fully informed, so service did not comply with r46(2) and the orders ought not to have been made under s33(1)(a).

  • 15 Jul 1985

    RE CHUNG CHEUK MAN

    Citation
    RE CHUNG CHEUK MAN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCB232/1985

    Mantell J. accepted jurisdiction to set aside the original Receiving Order because the debtors' solicitor was prevented from attending, then, after hearing the petition de novo and applying established principles on burden of proof and judicial discretion (including regard to the Official Receiver's view and public interest), exercised his discretion to make a fresh Receiving Order despite admissions of heavy indebtedness and potential insufficiency of assets to pay a 15% dividend.