Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Damages and mitigation

Legal area

Court

6 Aug 2021

TECHNIC STAR UNIVERSAL LTD v. TINY LOVE LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2284
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA192/2014

Technic Star was entitled to judgment for the undisputed contract sums (Lists A and B) and for two ready-to-ship purchase orders (List C). Tiny Love repudiated or unlawfully withheld shipment under several POs (List D) but Technic Star failed to prove quantum for those partially completed items so only nominal damages are awarded. An implied term existed that Tiny Love must place corresponding purchase orders under frame orders (First Part) but not an open implied term obliging Tiny Love to reimburse all claimed losses in the form pleaded (Second Part). The 'zeroing' argument was rejected as…
4 Sept 2018

黃林秀對陳麗陽

Citation

[2018] HKDC 1074
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3248/2014

The court found the binding contract was as recorded in the invoice and its oral amendments; the defendant completed his contractual obligations except installation of a kitchen cabinet which the plaintiff failed to provide, therefore the plaintiff breached by failing to pay the outstanding HK$20,000; the plaintiff's expert report and untested witness statements lacked weight; the defendant is entitled to HK$20,000 plus interest and costs.
24 Mar 2016

CHINA ALARM HOLDINGS ACQUISITION LLC AND ANOTHER v. ING ALEXANDER YIM LEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

CHINA ALARM HOLDINGS ACQUISITION LLC AND ANOTHER v. ING ALEXANDER YIM LEUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA503/2012

Court held that key representations (the compensation clause, the use‑of‑proceeds clauses and warranties in clauses 8.1(1), 9.1(4), 9.1(9) and 13.1) were false and fraudulent because defendant intended and procured CAHL to use part of investors’ funds to pay substantial sums via a related services agreement to entities he controlled to remunerate 'special consultants' who were used to lavishly entertain and improperly secure preferential treatment from PRC officials; those nondisclosures and fraudulent representations induced plaintiffs to invest and limitation did not bar the claim because t…
29 Mar 2012

SUNION DEVELOPMENT LTD v. NAM HOI BUS SERVICES CO LTD

Citation

SUNION DEVELOPMENT LTD v. NAM HOI BUS SERVICES CO LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4935/2009

Court found as fact that Sunion (through Lam) and Polyunit (through Ho and Leung) represented the Property to be open storage land suitable and lawful for Nam Hoi's intended use; Nam Hoi relied on those representations; vehicle parking fell within the contractual open storage use so Nam Hoi did not breach the Tenancy and Sunion's forfeiture was wrongful; Sunion is liable under the Misrepresentation Ordinance for inducing the contract; Polyunit breached statutory duties by failing to verify land use and is liable to Nam Hoi in respect of counterclaim items recoverable in law; damages were asse…
16 Apr 2010

YUEN YUNG FAI AND ANOTHER v. HUI TIN FOOK, DAVID

Citation

YUEN YUNG FAI AND ANOTHER v. HUI TIN FOOK, DAVID
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1662/2008

On the balance of probabilities the court preferred the defendant's and his clerk's evidence that the solicitor did not give the alleged advice; the plaintiffs therefore failed to prove negligence and causation and their claim was dismissed.
15 Jul 2009

LEUNG YUK LIN t/a KING\'S GLORY EDUCATIONAL CENTRE AND OTHERS v. KARSON OTEN FAN, KARNO

Citation

LEUNG YUK LIN t/a KING\'S GLORY EDUCATIONAL CENTRE AND OTHERS v. KARSON OTEN FAN, KARNO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA945/2006

The court found the 2003 Agreement genuine (accepting PW10 handwriting evidence and credibility of KG witnesses); the exclusivity undertaking and prohibition on collecting students' personal data were conditions of that agreement; Fan breached those conditions (unauthorised on-line teaching and improper collection of students' personal data) and, given the persistent breaches and Fan's conduct, KG was entitled to accept repudiation; judgment entered for Plaintiffs with damages of HKD 8,879,054 plus interest; most of Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
15 Jul 2009

LEUNG YUK LIN t/a KING\'S GLORY EDUCATIONAL CENTRE AND OTHERS v. KARSON OTEN FAN, KARNO

Citation

LEUNG YUK LIN t/a KING\'S GLORY EDUCATIONAL CENTRE AND OTHERS v. KARSON OTEN FAN, KARNO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA900/2006

Court accepted plaintiffs' handwriting expert and contemporaneous business evidence; found the 2003 Agreement authentic; held the exclusivity undertaking and prohibition on soliciting students' personal data were conditions of the contract; defendant breached those conditions (unauthorised online teaching and collecting students' personal data) and, viewed against a history of wilful breaches despite warnings, evinced an intention not to be bound; plaintiffs entitled to accept repudiation and recover damages; defendant's forgery allegation and most counterclaims rejected.
9 Feb 2009

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHONG KUI (GROUP) CO LTD

Citation

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHONG KUI (GROUP) CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA928/2007

On the evidence (contemporaneous police inspection records, photo reports, expert inspection and damage tables) the as‑installed barrier was not manufactured or installed to contractual specification and could not be expected to withstand Beaufort Wind Scale Force 12; there was no proven valid acceptance on 27 September 2004; the Government validly rejected the goods under clause 3(a) and lawfully terminated the contract; defendant liable for breach and counterclaim dismissed; limited categories of losses awarded in accordance with evidence and contractual principles.
20 Nov 2006

ATICO INTERNATIONAL (HK) LTD v. SPARKO (FAR EAST) LTD

Citation

ATICO INTERNATIONAL (HK) LTD v. SPARKO (FAR EAST) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA428/2004

Defendant breached the implied and contractual conditions of merchantable quality; plaintiff reasonably and lawfully settled Morrison's claim and incurred expenses which were within the parties' reasonable contemplation and covered by contractual indemnities, therefore plaintiff entitled to judgment for GBP 80,653.57 plus interest and costs, with costs to be assessed on a full indemnity basis under contract clause 11.
4 May 2006

HUI SIU KIM KIMME v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF PARC REGAL

Citation

HUI SIU KIM KIMME v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF PARC REGAL
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM284/2005

The Tribunal held that under Clause 34(f) of the DMC read with Clause 61 and section 18 of the Building Management Ordinance the Incorporated Owners were responsible for maintaining and repairing the external wall and cantilever projection and must rectify the water seepage, but the Applicant's claim for damages failed because she did not give timely notice and failed to mitigate loss, so Respondent was not liable for the claimed damages.