Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Clog on equity of redemption

Legal area

Court

29 Jun 2021

DING HUIRONG v. CHINA TIMES SECURITIES LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 927
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV112/2020

The Court made the costs orders nisi absolute and ordered both Defendants to pay the Plaintiff's costs of the appeals because the main substantive issue (clog on the equity of redemption) was resolved for the Plaintiff, the Defendants continued to pursue other grounds and refused to engage with the Plaintiff's redemption offers, there was no basis to apportion costs for Ground 1 and there was no reason to disturb the Recorder's exercise of discretion or his costs order below.
29 Jun 2021

DING HUIRONG v. CHINA TIMES SECURITIES LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 927
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV122/2020

The Court made the costs orders nisi absolute because the Plaintiff succeeded on the substantive issue (clog on the equity of redemption), the Defendants were not entitled to a costs award based on Ground 1 (which the Court did not decide and which did not justify variation), apportionment was inappropriate, and there was no basis to disturb the Recorder's exercise of discretion on costs below; accordingly each Defendant must pay the Plaintiff's costs of their respective summons to be taxed if not agreed.
2 Sept 2009

SHIH PHILIP v. LI WAI KEUNG

Citation

SHIH PHILIP v. LI WAI KEUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV77/2009

The transaction was a genuine sale with a buy‑back arrangement, not a mortgage; the option to repurchase had not been exercised; there was no clog on the equity of redemption and the agreement was not unconscionable or penal, therefore the judge below was correct and the appeal must be dismissed.
9 Oct 2008

SHIH PHILIP v. LI WAI KEUNG

Citation

SHIH PHILIP v. LI WAI KEUNG
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2901/2006

The Agreement was a genuine sale with a time‑limited option to repurchase, not a mortgage; the option required strict compliance with the timetable and was not exercised by defendant by June 2006; the forfeiture provisions were neither unconscionable nor penal; specific performance was appropriate and ordered, with Philip entitled to the property absolutely and to retain agreed rents, subject to repayment of sums the defendant had paid (HKD 9,800).
18 Oct 2000

WONG YIN v. UNION BANK OF HONG KONG LTD.

Citation

WONG YIN v. UNION BANK OF HONG KONG LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7578/1999

The legal charge's all-moneys clause, read with its covenants, covered Mr Wong's liability as guarantor; Jing Guang defaulted and the guarantor liability therefore existed; accordingly the Bank was entitled to demand repayment for redemption and the defendant's claim that the Bank clogged the equity of redemption was misconceived and failed.
4 Mar 1999

INTERNATIONAL BANK OF ASIA LTD. v. KEWPAISAL WARRANUCH AND OTHERS

Citation

INTERNATIONAL BANK OF ASIA LTD. v. KEWPAISAL WARRANUCH AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1421/1998

The judge held that proceeding under Order 88 and first hearing by a master was appropriate; the Guarantee permitted variations so the guarantors remained liable; the defendants failed to show the interest rate was penal or unenforceable; the bank was not acting unreasonably in refusing to release all-monies charges before full repayment and such refusal did not constitute a clog on the equity of redemption; accordingly the appeals were dismissed and costs were ordered against the defendants.

Hong Kong Case Law

DING HUIRONG v. CHINA TIMES SECURITIES LTD AND ANOTHER

DING HUIRONG v. CHINA TIMES SECURITIES LTD AND ANOTHER

SHIH PHILIP v. LI WAI KEUNG

SHIH PHILIP v. LI WAI KEUNG

WONG YIN v. UNION BANK OF HONG KONG LTD.

INTERNATIONAL BANK OF ASIA LTD. v. KEWPAISAL WARRANUCH AND OTHERS