Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Breach of contract

Legal area

Court

30 Apr 2026

LEUNG YUET WAH v. TANG MAI LOK by TANG PING FAI his guardian ad litem

Citation

[2026] HKDC 751
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6587/2020

The Plaintiff failed to prove the existence of the alleged oral agreement on the balance of probabilities because (1) the Plaintiff was not a credible or reliable witness on the central issues; (2) there was an absence of contemporaneous documentary evidence for a substantial informal promise made in the context of contentious matrimonial negotiations; (3) recorded telephone conversations undermined the Plaintiff's account; and (4) the overall context and the Plaintiff's conduct made the alleged agreement inherently improbable; accordingly the claim was dismissed.
17 Apr 2026

FRIENDS FOOD (HONG KONG) COMPANY LTD v. FRIENDS FROZEN FOOD COMPANY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKDC 659
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1670/2022

The court found that Yeung and F Frozen Food knowingly made false pre-contractual representations and intended them to be relied upon by Mak and promoters of F Food HK; defendants had in fact formed and acted on the intention to set up Goodsview and compete before the transfer, breaching the express contract terms (including an enforceable 84-month non-compete) and fiduciary/contractual duties to transfer customers, staff and cooperate in licence transfer; misappropriation of receivables of $66,396 was proved but alleged theft of stock was not proved; rescission was inappropriate because rest…
13 Apr 2026

PERVEZ AKHTER v. JACKY CHAU KING YIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKLdT 21
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDPE1575/2025

Conditions 3 and 5 of the Early Termination Agreement were not 'secondary' and imposed specific obligations including permission to remove items; Respondents failed to prove permission (breach of Condition 5) and provided insufficient evidence that fixtures/equipment were left and in working order (insufficient to satisfy Condition 3); acceptance of $35,000 and keys did not constitute waiver by conduct because the sum was part-payment of arrears and acceptance pre-dated the breach consequences; CCTV material did not meet Ladd v Marshall criteria and would not likely change the result; no argu…
20 Feb 2026

CHEN, JIONGFA及另一人對珞雅室內設計工程有限公司

Citation

[2026] HKDC 306
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4200/2022

Because the defendant failed to file witness statements or attend trial, the court disregarded any defendant evidence, accepted the unchallenged testimony and expert report of the plaintiffs as credible, found breaches including failure to exercise reasonable skill and delay, but limited damages to the amounts particularised in the statement of claim; awarded HKD1,097,332.00 plus prescribed interest and costs to the plaintiffs.
9 Feb 2026

LAU HING CHAK KATHERINE formerly known as LAU, KATHERINE TIN KI AND ANOTHER v. GRACEFUL CHINA DEVELOPMENT LTD

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 884
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA900/2021

The 2014 and 2017 agreements, read together and on their proper construction, obliged the defendant to deliver the bare-shell houses and to transfer title to the lands to the 1st Plaintiff (agent for the 2nd). The defendant breached those obligations, and having been enriched by the Sum at the Plaintiffs' expense (with no available defence), the Plaintiffs are entitled to repayment of HK$25,930,000 with interest and costs; judgment is entered for the 2nd Plaintiff accordingly.
11 Dec 2025

LAI YAU FOON v. WONG TIN CHEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1944
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP46/2021

The court found the 3rd Defendant breached Clause 4 by failing to deliver vacant possession; the defence of total waiver failed for lack of clear and unequivocal representation and inconsistent evidence; Clause 22 need not be finally determined because breach of Clause 4 sufficed; damages were assessed by reference to the difference between the contract price and the amount received under the settlement with the 1st Defendant (HK$450,000); the 3rd and 4th Defendants, having entered the Agreement together, are jointly liable, and the court ordered judgment for the Plaintiff against them accord…
26 Nov 2025

FAB4 LTD trading as LUCALE v. SING YU DECORATION ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 2001
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1033/2024

Plaintiff established breach of contract and/or duty of care; damages were assessed by adopting expert valuations where appropriate and actual expenditures where claimed and proved, rejecting unproven lost sales but allowing alternative wages for three days; total compensatory award calculated as HK$280,818.40; costs of assessment summarily fixed at HK$135,000; interest awarded from the date of claim at contractual/express statutory rate declared in the judgment.
16 Oct 2025

HAN JOHN ALEXANDER v. HONGKONG AUTOPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4987
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA954/2022

On the balance of probabilities Autopal failed to discharge the burden of proving the asserted gold sale and that it was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice or that it changed position in good faith; accordingly the USD900,000 is held on trust for the Plaintiff (traceable property) and the Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration, an account and inquiry and payment of any sums found due together with interest; Omega is liable for breach of contract but damages are limited to the pleaded sum of USD900,000 with interest from 18 July 2023.
9 Oct 2025

GENESPRINT GROUP LTD 對 GBA SERVICE LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1600
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6443/2020

The court found there was a valid contract formed by the quotation signed by the plaintiff, the defendant performed the contracted services on 21 May 2020, the plaintiff failed to adduce evidence of the alleged breaches or to plead termination, and therefore the defendant was entitled to judgment for the contractual price of HKD150,000 plus interest and costs.
9 Oct 2025

GENESPRINT GROUP LTD 對 GBA SERVICE LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1600
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ372/2021

The quotation signed by the parties created a binding contract; the defendant performed the contractual obligations for the press launch on 21 May 2020; the plaintiff failed to adduce any evidence at trial to prove the alleged breaches or that the contract was validly terminated; accordingly the plaintiff is liable to pay the contracted fee together with interest and costs.