15 Nov 2024
The Master held that JTrust, properly joined as intervener, had established that D's Undertakings were an effective cause of the claimed operating and legal expenses, that the Indemnity Deed covered those expenses as reasonably incurred, and that the type of loss was reasonably foreseeable; accordingly JTrust was awarded US$680,357.61 with interest and costs.
9 Apr 2024
Court found CLC breached duty by opening and operating the account without a compliant up-to-date COI (deficient due diligence) but that breach did not causally produce the plaintiff’s loss. The Quincecare duty and dishonest assistance were not made out because the facts known to CLC did not, on balance, present a serious or real possibility of misappropriation that would have required CLC to refuse execution. Causation and remoteness arguments favoured defendants (Wong could have transferred from Fulbright); illegality defence was not available on pleaded facts; contributory misconduct by th…
29 Oct 2021
The Court of Appeal held the judge erred in law in concluding the proposed appeal had no reasonable prospect of success because (a) on the strike-out application the plaintiff must be assumed, for present purposes, to have been mentally incapacitated at the time of settlement and there was a prima facie arguable causal link between the defendant's failure to seek court protection under Order 80 and the plaintiff's losses (abnormal disbursements and spousal exploitation), and (b) the judge failed to properly take into account the particulars in the 1st FBP and wrongly treated the 2nd FBP as su…
25 Jun 2021
The Court of Appeal held the trial judge erred in exercising his discretion by failing to apply the correct legal principles and facts: the HK$622 million loss was readily ascertainable, causation was established under the fiduciary "but for" test, the liquidators would not practically pursue separate proceedings and supported a compensation order, and therefore the appeal is allowed and a compensation order for HK$622 million plus interest and costs should be made against the 1st to 3rd respondents jointly and severally.
27 Mar 2019
The court confirmed that compensation for loss caused by a wrongly granted Mareva injunction is to be assessed by reference to causation and remoteness principles and that the appropriate remedy for defendants is enforcement of the cross‑undertaking in the original proceedings; an inquiry into such damages can properly be referred to and heard by a Master.
12 Oct 2018
The master exercised discretion to refuse enforcement of the undertaking because the 3rd defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonably arguable case of loss causally attributable to the injunction; documentary evidence was lacking and allegations were speculative, therefore no inquiry and no damages were awarded.
20 Jul 2018
The court held that s.3(1) of the Misrepresentation Ordinance attracts the tortious measure of deceit (per Doyle v Olby) and that the plaintiff is entitled to recover all actual losses directly flowing from the misrepresentation; applying that test the specified heads were recoverable and judgment was entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $798,405.36 with interest and costs.
8 Sept 2017
Majority held (1) the telephone communication identifying the plaintiff as provider of the Document was not on an occasion of absolute privilege; (2) the plaintiff established a defamatory innuendo (8A(c)) that he assisted in the unworthy challenge for personal gain; (3) malicious falsehood and section 23/24 thresholds were satisfied for business-related harm so special damage need not be proved for those statutory limbs, but (4) losses arising from republication on occasions covered by absolute privilege were not recoverable from the original publisher as a matter of policy and to preserve t…
8 May 2017
Court accepted defendant's liability but made detailed findings on quantum: psychiatric injuries of parents were caused by the original nervous shocks and were compensable; however the severe setback after receipt of the Medical Council letter was held to be objectively irrelevant to the defendant's tort and not recoverable as an aggravation. The Father Care Claim was awarded on the basis of a notional-earnings baseline reduced for part-time earnings ($172,500). The Mother was awarded PSLA and economic heads totalling $935,920; the Father was awarded PSLA and specific heads totalling $293,211…
8 May 2017
Liability for the medical negligence was admitted. The court accepted that both parents suffered recognisable psychiatric disorders triggered by the index incident and awarded damages for PSLA and certain economic and care losses. The Medical Council correspondence produced a separate psychiatric setback for which the defendant was not responsible and which was largely objectively irrelevant to the pleaded cause; accordingly the court excluded or discounted losses attributable solely to that separate event. The father care claim was valued by reference to notional earnings reduced for modest…