Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Duty to obtain proper price

Legal area

Court

26 Jan 2024

FLY SMART LTD v. 林廷謙 AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 276
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA380/2023

The court found Marco's alleged assurances incredible and entered judgment in HCA 380/2023 against Lam for HK$19,500,000 with interest, because there was no triable issue as to the enforceability of the Settlement Agreement; however, the court found triable issues existed in HCA 416/2023 concerning whether Fly Smart breached any duty in selling the HTI shares at undervalue and the legal consequences for Lam's guarantee, and therefore granted Lam unconditional leave to defend HCA 416/2023 and dismissed the interim payment application.
26 Jan 2024

FLY SMART LTD v. 柯兆堅 AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 276
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA416/2023

The court found Marco's alleged assurances inherently unbelievable and unsupported by contemporaneous evidence, therefore no triable issue on that ground; however, there were triable issues about whether Fly Smart breached any duty in selling the bulk HTI shares at materially lower private sale prices (sales nos 6 and 7) and whether such conduct would discharge or reduce Lam's liability as guarantor, so summary judgment on HCA416 was refused and unconditional leave to defend was granted; summary judgment was entered on HCA380 for the undisputed settlement sum against Lam.
6 Oct 2008

RE LAI KA HING FANCO

Citation

RE LAI KA HING FANCO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB5750/2007

The petition is allowed because the debtor failed to establish a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds and failed to show that the petitioner's refusal of his low, unsupported settlement offer under s.6D(3) was unreasonable; the petitioner complied with its duty in selling the property by auction with independent valuations.
16 Jun 2000

SIU CHI LIM STEVE v. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD.

Citation

SIU CHI LIM STEVE v. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSD22/2000

The applicants produced credible, contemporaneous valuation evidence (including the Bank's own August valuation) and factual evidence showing a realistic prospect that separate sales would have yielded materially higher proceeds; on that basis the court found a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds and an arguable counterclaim which may equal or exceed the indebtedness claimed, and therefore set aside the statutory demands against the individuals and granted an injunction restraining winding up petitions against the companies until trial of HCA No.2856/2000 or further order.

Hong Kong Case Law

FLY SMART LTD v. 林廷謙 AND ANOTHER

FLY SMART LTD v. 柯兆堅 AND ANOTHER

RE LAI KA HING FANCO

SIU CHI LIM STEVE v. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD.