Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Causing loss by unlawful means

Legal area

Court

2 Apr 2025

MSB INTERNATIONAL LTD v. SALLY JOANNA ELAINE BOWER

Citation

[2025] HKDC 487
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3302/2023

The court refused to strike out the claim because the Statement of Claim, read as a whole, sufficiently pleaded the elements of causing loss by unlawful means based on alleged breaches of the defendant’s duties to HKJC (not deceit), including making the alleged representations, interference, intention to injure as a means to benefit a friend, and pleaded damages; disputed facts and matters of reliance are for trial. The Discovery Application became unnecessary after the defendant’s supplemental disclosure but the defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the discovery application d…
13 Dec 2023

CHINA CONCRETE COMPANY LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2282
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA997/2022

The amended statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action and must be struck out: the ASOC fails to plead essential elements for each tort (no pleaded actual breach of contract, no pleaded unlawful means actionable against third parties, no sufficient facts to infer malice or dishonest motive, and no particularised facts supporting misfeasance intent); declaratory relief amounting to a declaration of non-criminality was inappropriate and prejudicial while criminal prosecutions under the APCO were pending; accordingly the SOC/ASOC are struck out and the civil action dismissed.
5 Sept 2023

HONG KONG VENDING SYSTEM COMPANY LTD v. LUI KIN MING AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1175
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5064/2022

Court struck out the 2nd defendant's claim in its entirety and struck specified paragraphs and reliefs because the Amended Statement of Claim failed to plead material facts against the 2nd defendant (speculative inferences, lack of particulars) and the sole remaining monetary claim against her (non-compete) fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Labour Tribunal; conspiracy and causing loss by unlawful means were inadequately pleaded and struck out; certain restrictive covenant and confidence claims against the 1st defendant survived as fact-sensitive and arguable.
7 Feb 2023

鄭惠芬對黃玉英

Citation

[2023] HKDC 171
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6404/2019

The plaintiff’s claims fail because the pleaded and proven facts do not show that the forgery caused loss of authorised occupant status (the TPS terms and Housing Authority correspondence confirm she remained a recognised occupant), the plaintiff failed to prove refusal by the defendant to return belongings, key factual evidence by the plaintiff was unreliable, and several asserted losses or novel legal arguments were not properly pleaded and therefore cannot support relief; accordingly all claims dismissed and costs awarded to defendant.
27 Aug 2018

GOSSIP DAILY LTD v. NEXT MEDIA MAGAZINES LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1951
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA305/2018

The arbitration clause in the SPA was clear and wide, expressly covering disputes including non-contractual obligations arising out of or relating to the agreement; the tortious claims arose out of and related to the SPA and therefore fell within the clause; accordingly the requirements of s20 Cap 609 were met and the court was obliged to order a stay of all further proceedings pending arbitration.
3 Jun 2013

C Y FOUNDATION GROUP LTD AND ANOTHER v. BEST MAX HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

C Y FOUNDATION GROUP LTD AND ANOTHER v. BEST MAX HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA787/2011

The Court held that on the pleaded facts and taking pleaded facts as true the claims for dishonest assistance and conspiracy against Lo raised triable issues and could not be struck out; the Guarantee claim could be maintained subject to permitted amendments to plead setting aside conversion/transfer; the restitution claim against Lo was struck out because no enrichment of Lo was pleaded (benefit flowed to Best Max and no veil‑lifting or exception pleaded); the tort of causing loss by unlawful means was inapt and those words and the related prayer were struck out as against Lo. Leave was gran…
25 Apr 2012

AXA CHINA REGION INSURANCE CO LTD v. LIN KWAI YING KATIE

Citation

AXA CHINA REGION INSURANCE CO LTD v. LIN KWAI YING KATIE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1228/2011

The amended statement of claim was struck out because it is defective and fails to plead essential material facts (specific dealings, solicitation/inducement and intention) such that it discloses no reasonable cause of action on the tort of causing loss by unlawful means; however, because the legal issue as to the scope of 'unlawful means' is unsettled and the tort claim is not mere 'window-dressing', the plaintiff was granted leave to re-amend the statement of claim within 21 days rather than having the action dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

MSB INTERNATIONAL LTD v. SALLY JOANNA ELAINE BOWER

CHINA CONCRETE COMPANY LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

HONG KONG VENDING SYSTEM COMPANY LTD v. LUI KIN MING AND ANOTHER

鄭惠芬 對 黃玉英

GOSSIP DAILY LTD v. NEXT MEDIA MAGAZINES LTD AND OTHERS

C Y FOUNDATION GROUP LTD AND ANOTHER v. BEST MAX HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS

AXA CHINA REGION INSURANCE CO LTD v. LIN KWAI YING KATIE

鄭惠芬對黃玉英