25 Sept 2008
The Court found the Defendant's denials credible and the Plaintiff failed to prove that the Defendant signed the agreements or received the loan; there was a real prospect of a successful defence, so Master Poon's order setting aside the judgment was correct and the Plaintiff's appeal was dismissed.
7 Oct 2005
The court accepted the plaintiff's oral evidence that his true income was HK$8,000 per month with an annual bonus and that accommodation formed part of his employment; it found on the balance of probabilities that his employment was terminated as a consequence of the injuries and scarring from the accident and awarded damages for PSLA and quantified special losses accordingly.
4 May 1988
The Court upheld the trial judge's finding that the plaintiffs and defendants formed a four‑man partnership based on credible oral evidence and supporting witness testimony, and that some documents were not inconsistent with that finding; consequently the defendants breached fiduciary duties by claiming the Guangzhou agreement's benefit for themselves. The appeal was dismissed.