Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Contractual interest

Legal area

Court

8 May 2026

MAXX MARKETING LTD v. PPM TOYS LTD

Citation

[2026] HKDC 749
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ114/2023

The Distributor Agreement was effectively extended by mutual conduct and waiver evidenced by the parties' sales confirmations and the plaintiff's failure to insist on the Minimum Annual Purchase Guarantee; PPM Mexico acted as a nominee/agent of PPM Toys Limited based on common ownership and management, shared representatives and email domain, payment history from the defendant's bank account and the parties' course of dealing; therefore the defendant is liable as principal for the unpaid purchase price of the Sales Confirmations and the plaintiff is entitled to contractual interest and costs.
10 Nov 2025

THE ONE PROPERTY LTD v. XIAO NAN GUO MANAGEMENT COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5244
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA759/2021

The landlord validly accepted repudiation and re-entered on 5 August 2020; the Plaintiff took reasonable steps to mitigate; the Plaintiff's unchallenged, contemporaneously supported evidence established the quantum of loss; therefore damages are assessed and awarded as calculated (HK$6,693,165.57) with contractual interest, security deposit set-off and indemnity costs.
11 Jul 2025

TSANG YUEN WANG t/a Second Brother（二師兄） v. LEUNG WANG HONG

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1123
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2772/2022

The court held the written Settlement Agreement was valid and enforceable: the Defendant failed to prove duress; the agreement was not void for vagueness; forbearance to sue provided sufficient consideration; the Defendant breached by non-payment; the Plaintiff's assertion that the contractual daily interest should be 0.8% (contrary to the written 8%) was not proved and was rejected; consequently judgment was entered for the Plaintiff for HK$1,000,000 with interest at the judgment rate from the date of judgment and a costs order nisi.
20 Feb 2025

NEWLY RISE INTERNATIONAL LTD v. YANG XIAOQIU AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 680
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1186/2020

The Court found on the evidence (Madam Wang's credible sworn testimony and documentary evidence) that Ds made the representations and acted in concert; the Refund Provision formed part of the Final Agreement; P relied on the representations and paid HK$13.75m; the acquisition became unviable by 22 November 2018; therefore Ds were contractually obliged to refund P with contractual interest from 29 November 2018 and, separately, the monies were held on a Quistclose trust in favour of P so D1 must account for traceable proceeds. D1's causation defence and counterclaim failed for lack of evidence.
13 Dec 2024

BOC GROUP LIFE ASSURANCE AND ANOTHER v. WONG FU WAH

Citation

[2024] HKDC 2089
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4648/2019

Express terms of the Agent’s Agreement and IR Agreement (including rights to terminate without cause and express clawback and repayment provisions) govern; the alleged implied anti‑avoidance terms were inconsistent with those express terms and not necessary for business efficacy, so they are not implied; Plaintiff had genuine grounds to terminate based on substantial unresolved tax liabilities and fit-and-proper concerns; alleged collateral/overall and recruitment agreements were unsupported by credible evidence and displaced by entire agreement clauses; Plaintiff entitled to repayment, contr…
4 Jan 2024

CHAN CHEUK KIT v. SMARTA INNOVATION TECHNOLOGY CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKDC 49
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3564/2021

Clause 5 was properly engaged because on the balance of probabilities the Company had substantial outstanding liabilities on the Completion Date in breach of clause 8; that breach justified Plaintiff withholding completion and treating the HK$1.5M as a loan under clause 5 with contractual interest; accordingly judgment entered for Plaintiff against D1 and D2 (as guarantor) for principal and contractual interest; 2nd Defendant's defences and counterclaim failed for lack of evidence.
10 Jul 2023

FINEDALE INDUSTRIES LTD v. ONG BAN SENG

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1952
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1350/2021

The Deed of Guarantee was validly signed, sealed and delivered and is enforceable against the defendant; the tenancy terminated on re-entry by the landlord on 26 March 2021; the defendant is liable under the Deed for unpaid sums and loss for the remainder of the term; the adjournment was refused because the defendant produced no medical evidence and failed to show exceptional circumstances; admitted late documents did not prejudice the defendant.
9 Jun 2023

POWERTECHNIC LTD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF MONTE VISTA

Citation

[2023] HKDC 750
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ874/2019

The written Contracts unambiguously named Powertechnic Limited as contractor; the defendant did not prove a mistake of identity or lack of consensus ad idem; PL was entitled to enforce the Contract and recover HK$2,068,088.70 with contractual interest; the defendant's counterclaim for repayment of HK$413,617.74 failed.
20 May 2021

SOUTHWEST SECURITIES (HK) BROKERAGE LTD v. NIEUMARKT INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 740
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV250/2020

The Court held that the defendants' case on a collateral agreement was not credible and/or legally uncertain and thus failed; the plaintiff's claim was for a liquidated sum and both borrower and guarantor incurred liabilities in debt under the Facility Agreement entitling the lender to final judgment for the specified sum; the existence of mortgage security and its possible realisation does not preclude entering judgment for the debt, particularly where the guarantor waived first recourse, and the contractual default interest provision (30% p.a., compounded annually) is enforceable; according…
22 Feb 2021

KENCY BROTHERS LTD v. LAU MAN SANG JAMES

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 415
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1567/2012

The court accepted the Plaintiffs' witnesses as credible, found the Settlement Agreement contained the final agreed accounts and that there was no credible evidence of binding collateral oral agreements, misrepresentation or duress; Clause 18/20 required written amendments; factual findings established entitlement to the contractual interest on the loans; accordingly judgment was entered for the Plaintiffs and Kency Brothers for the specified sums with interest and costs to the Plaintiffs.