Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Counter‑restitution

Legal area

Court

26 Sept 2023

STEF KRAUSS v. BRIGHT DAY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1347
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1046/2022

The appeal was allowed because the defendants raised credible triable issues: the meaning of 'one-fifth ownership' required factual and industry-contextual inquiry (direct registration v share transfer), there was evidence of part performance and substantial user by the plaintiff, potential impossibility or legal uncertainty in effecting direct 1/5 vessel registration required trial determination, and the 1st defendant pleaded a credible defence of counter-restitution for maintenance costs; accordingly summary judgment and the striking out of the counterclaim were inappropriate.
14 Jul 2023

FIRST LASER LTD v. FUJIAN ENTERPRISES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCA 857
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV97/2020

The Court exercised its discretion to decline indemnity costs despite defendants' success, awarded the defendants 80% of the costs of the appeal and 80% of the costs of the remitter proceedings to be taxed on a party and party basis with certificates for two counsel, and reduced defendants' recoverable costs by 20% for unsuccessful discrete issues; costs of the present application ordered nisi at 80%.
31 Mar 2023

FIRST LASER LTD v. FUJIAN ENTERPRISES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCA 465
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV97/2020

Appeal allowed. The Court of Appeal set aside the Remitter Judgment because the judge erred in finding a collateral nominee investment contract and in applying Provisions I Article 18 on that basis; the judge’s findings were inconsistent with earlier appellate and SPC determinations and unsupported by evidence; the alternative restitution award based on an expansive reading of 'fruits' and a principle of fairness was unjustified; accordingly the proper remedy is to restore parties to their pre‑contract position under Mainland law (return of purchase price net of what must be returned to FEHC)…
8 Apr 2020

FIRST LASER LTD v. FUJIAN ENTERPRISES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 495
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4414/2001

On the remitted issue the court found that, on the factual matrix (the 1996 agreements, the 1998 memorandum and the parties' conduct), a collateral nominee investment relationship by conduct existed between First Laser (actual investor) and FEHC (nominee shareholder). That void nominee investment contract gave First Laser a PRC-law restitution remedy under Article 18: return of its investment money and a reasonable distribution of the enhancement in value (fruits including dividends and capital growth) measured by the equity value at sale (JDS US$60m). The court adjusted the distribution rati…
13 Mar 2018

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. PAK KWAN HO AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 523
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1637/2015

The Legal Charge’s clause 1.03 properly extends the definition of 'Mortgagor' so that references operate as to the co‑mortgagors or any of them and, read with the all‑monies clause in clause 1.01, creates a joint and several primary obligation to repay all monies owing by either mortgagor including present and future debts incurred solely by one mortgagor; the factual matrix did not displace that textual meaning; the pleaded defences (material change/Holme, undue influence, misrepresentation, waiver) failed on the evidence; accordingly judgment entered for the Bank against the 2nd defendant f…
31 Aug 2015

ZEBRA INDUSTRIES (OROGENESIS NOVA) LTD v. WAH TONG PAPER PRODUCTS GROUP LTD

Citation

ZEBRA INDUSTRIES (OROGENESIS NOVA) LTD v. WAH TONG PAPER PRODUCTS GROUP LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP436/2013

Court found on the facts that ZION was impecunious, Wah Tong knew or strongly suspected that fact and unjustifiably withheld payment of the amended award; that withholding constituted illegitimate commercial pressure amounting to economic duress and was a cause of ZION entering the settlement; accordingly the settlement agreement and consent order were rescinded subject to counter-restitution by ZION of HK$125,000 and other orders as set out.

Hong Kong Case Law

STEF KRAUSS v. BRIGHT DAY LTD AND ANOTHER

FIRST LASER LTD v. FUJIAN ENTERPRISES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

FIRST LASER LTD v. FUJIAN ENTERPRISES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

FIRST LASER LTD v. FUJIAN ENTERPRISES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. PAK KWAN HO AND ANOTHER

ZEBRA INDUSTRIES (OROGENESIS NOVA) LTD v. WAH TONG PAPER PRODUCTS GROUP LTD