Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Equitable relief

Legal area

Court

24 Mar 2006

CHINA CONSTRUCTION REALTY LTD v. SINO BUSINESS SERVICES PROPRIETARY LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

CHINA CONSTRUCTION REALTY LTD v. SINO BUSINESS SERVICES PROPRIETARY LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1294/2005

On the face of the untraversed statement of claim the plaintiff established that the Lucky Dragon Agreement and subsequent transfers were dispositions made with intent to defraud a creditor within s60 CPO; accordingly the Master’s dismissal was set aside and the court, exercising its discretion under Order 19 r7, granted relief setting aside the agreement and transfers, ordered consequential disclosure and restoration steps, ordered damages to be assessed by the Master, adjourned interest to the assessment stage and awarded costs to the plaintiff.
28 Nov 1995

LEE Gee Kee & OTHER v. CHONG Kai Tai & OTHER

Citation

LEE Gee Kee & OTHER v. CHONG Kai Tai & OTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV109/1995

By majority the Court held that the agreement made payment of the balance by 17 July 1991 time‑essential; the purchasers failed to pay and were in breach; the purchasers were not entitled to specific performance because, on the court's construction, completion need not have been simultaneous and the purchasers' case that vendors were unable to complete was not established on pleadings and evidence; appeal allowed and lower court's order for specific performance set aside.
30 Jan 1995

CHEER KING INVESTMENTS LTD v. RICH GLORY INVESTMENT LTD

Citation

CHEER KING INVESTMENTS LTD v. RICH GLORY INVESTMENT LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA9497/1994

The 10% sum paid before breach was a conventional deposit and was forfeitable despite being described as liquidated damages; a purchaser who has defaulted and thereby lost the right to recover the money has no basis for a lien. The Registrar's order striking out the lien claim was correct and the appeal is dismissed.
13 Jul 1994

LAI KAM HON v. WONG LUN HING

Citation

LAI KAM HON v. WONG LUN HING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA8131/1991

Where a defendant relies on a time of the essence contractual construction to obtain summary judgment for a short delay, the court must nevertheless refuse summary disposal if the plaintiff raises a cognizable equitable defence that relief against forfeiture may be available and there are triable issues of fact as to the vendor's conduct causing or contributing to the breach; accordingly unconditional leave to defend should be granted.
26 Mar 1984

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATIONAL LTD v. HELYMAN TRADING LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

LLOYDS BANK INTERNATIONAL LTD v. HELYMAN TRADING LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA13537/1983

The court set aside the Master's order for final judgment because the 2nd Defendant raised an arguable equitable defence that he signed the guarantee on the representation that it would be joint and several and that another guarantor would execute, making the obligation conditional and incomplete in equity; therefore the matter must be tried.
28 Jul 1982

JOHN DAVID ROOT AND ANOTHER v. NANYANG COMMERCIAL BANK LTD

Citation

JOHN DAVID ROOT AND ANOTHER v. NANYANG COMMERCIAL BANK LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1119/1982

The passbook rules did not make production of the passbook a condition precedent to the bank's liability to repay; the English wording was permissive ('will on production repay') and the Chinese version regulated the depositor's right to withdraw rather than creating a mandatory bank obligation, so the bank's inherent debtor obligation to repay on demand remained; plaintiffs sufficiently explained non-production due to seizure thereby entitling them to repayment.
11 Apr 1978

SUNG HING-CHUEN v. CHENG TSUI

Citation

SUNG HING-CHUEN v. CHENG TSUI
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ7810/1977

Where parties to an oral tenancy in Hong Kong expressly stipulate domestic user, that term will be treated as a condition subsequent giving the landlord a right of re-entry; here the defendant committed a continuing breach by carrying on business in the flat, the plaintiff's rent demand did not amount to waiver because the breach was continuing, and equitable relief was refused because the defendant's breach was flagrant and persistent.
26 May 1976

THE EXCELSIOR v. BERNARD N. DA SILVA

Citation

THE EXCELSIOR v. BERNARD N. DA SILVA
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1543/1975

S.52(1) must be read as subjecting the power to grant injunctions to the subsection's limitations and injunctions in the District Court are only available ancillary to causes within its jurisdiction; a restraint on leaving the colony to secure payment of a simple debt for hotel charges is not ancillary to the substantive cause and the ex parte application was therefore beyond the Court's jurisdiction and properly dismissed, also absent sufficient evidence of urgency or defendant's presence.
2 Jul 1947

TANG FONG CHUEN v. TANG CHI KIN

Citation

TANG FONG CHUEN v. TANG CHI KIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1/1946

The court rejected estoppel based on failure to notify because no special duty to disclose existed between the parties; head (3) was struck out as unpleaded; but the defendant adduced sufficient evidence to raise a prima facie case that the plaintiff knowingly stood by while improvements were made, thereby shifting the onus to the plaintiff to explain his lack of knowledge and inaction.