Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Change of position defence

Legal area

Court

5 Dec 2025

LANTON NICOLE ELIZABETH v. SHU WENQIN

Citation

[2025] HKDC 2029
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2635/2022

The court found the plaintiff credible and proved on the balance of probabilities that HK$577,452 was traceably received by the defendant from the plaintiff; the enrichment was at the plaintiff's expense and was unjust because the transfers resulted from a fraudulent scheme and mistake; the defendant failed to establish change of position or ministerial receipt and her evidence was rejected, and the defendant acquired knowledge making retention unconscionable so she is personally liable to account and must repay the Sum; constructive trust declaration over the Sum was refused for lack of evid…
18 Nov 2025

CHAN TING TING v. GUO GEORGE AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1928
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4406/2020

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiff established unjust enrichment: the 1st Defendant was enriched by funds traceable to the Plaintiff and that enrichment was unjust because the transfers were made without the Plaintiff's knowledge, consent or authority; the 1st Defendant failed to prove the alleged oral agreement and therefore failed to establish the bona fide purchaser and change of position defences; no constructive trust was imposed because tracing to retained funds failed and there was no pleaded wrongdoing or sufficient evidence of knowledge; judgment for Plaintiff for USD134,3…
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.
2 Jul 2025

RE GOLDSTONE HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2778
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW609/2024

The petition was dismissed because there existed a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds as to whether the petitioner had an immediately payable debt: the payment was made under a subsisting subscription contract, there was no clear demonstrated total failure of consideration, repudiation and entitlement to terminate were not established as a matter for summary proceeding, and the company raised an arguable change‑of‑position defence; accordingly the statutory demand did not establish insolvency for winding‑up purposes.
31 Mar 2025

SHIBAURA ELECTRONICS HONG KONG CO., LTD v. MICROSTART GROUP LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1283
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA705/2022

The 1st Defendant failed to prove the existence of any genuine transaction with Vancii: key witnesses with personal knowledge were not produced, documentary provenance and authenticity were not established, and the 1st Defendant's principal witness was not credible. On that factual basis the court found the 1st Defendant received HK$5,778,000 without basis and, having acquired knowledge upon receipt of the writ, became a constructive trustee of that sum; accordingly the Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration, tracing/account, repayment of HK$5,778,000 with interest and costs.
25 Nov 2024

BCPE DIAMOND HOLDCO SRL v. SUNWE PLASTIC HK LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3370
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA221/2023

Summary judgment granted because plaintiff proved the challenged sums were traceable proceeds of funds misappropriated from plaintiff and thus enrichments of D3 and D5 were at plaintiff's expense and legally unjust; D3 and D5 failed to raise any triable issues or produce cogent evidence to establish the defences of bona fide purchase for value without notice or change of position; the proprietary claim against D5 also made out on tracing and Clayton presumption.
6 Nov 2024

CREATE TOGETHER TECHNOLOGY CO LTD v. WELLTEC INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2819
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA659/2024

The court continued the proprietary injunction limited to the funds in the Defendant's accounts traced to the Plaintiff because there is a serious issue to be tried in unjust enrichment and the balance of convenience favors preservation; the Mareva (freezing) injunction was not continued because the Plaintiff failed to establish a good arguable case on the fraudulent nature of the contracts at this interlocutory stage.
2 Aug 2024

DONALD SIDNEY DOBKIN v. HUNG WING FUNG

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1216
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1733/2022

Although change of position is legally available where the defendant received no benefit, the defendant's affirmation was evidentially insufficient to establish the defence; accordingly conditional leave to defend was granted only if the defendant paid HKD1,971,742.28 into court within 56 days, failing which judgment for the specified sums, interest and costs would be entered and a declaration of ownership was made in favour of the plaintiff.
28 Jun 2024

SIA YEE SUN v. MAX GOLDEN INDUSTRIAL LTD

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1040
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2762/2020

On the uncontradicted documentary and witness evidence the court inferred a conspiracy involving IG and the Defendant via identified agents, found the Defendant received HK$200,000 by fraud and/or that the payment was made under a mistake, rejected the change of position defence for lack of evidential support, and held the Defendant liable as constructive trustee to repay HK$200,000 with interest and costs.
7 Jun 2024

LI JIA HENG v. GOLDEN WORLD MOTORS (INTERNATIONAL) LTD

Citation

[2024] HKDC 888
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2932/2020

On the facts the deposit was paid and received on a joint understanding that the Agreement would become binding; that basis wholly failed because the vehicle was not delivered and no binding contract was completed; the defendant failed to prove change of position or bona fide purchaser defences (failed to prove delivery to Wong or application of the deposit); plaintiff entitled to restitution of HK$320,000 plus interest and defendant's counterclaim dismissed.