16 Feb 2026
The court held the trial judge correctly assessed the totality of evidence (D1's testimony, CCTV, WhatsApp voice/texts and applicant's recorded interview); identified inconsistencies were not central and did not undermine D1's reliability; the evidence against the applicant was overwhelming; no reasonable prospect of success on appeal was shown, therefore leave was properly refused.
29 May 2017
The court set aside the master's summary judgment because the WhatsApp messages gave rise to genuine triable issues about whether they effected a binding variation of the 2013 settlement agreement (consideration, without prejudice status, estoppel) and those factual and mixed questions were unsuitable for determination on summary judgment; accordingly the defendant was granted unconditional leave to defend and the matter should proceed to trial or further directions.
31 Oct 2016
On the balance of probabilities the court found there was no binding loan agreement because the MSN exchanges did not establish agreement on essential terms (notably the loan amount) and were conducted in a jocular manner, whereas contemporaneous messages and transaction summaries supported the defendant's account that the money was entrusted for investment; accordingly the plaintiff's claim was dismissed.