Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Expert accounting evidence

Legal area

Court

4 Aug 2016

CHAN KON FUNG v. GALLOP PIONEER LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHAN KON FUNG v. GALLOP PIONEER LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1357/2011

The court allowed defendants to re-amend their Defence & Counterclaim because their proposed amendments were consistent with existing pleadings and necessary to clarify issues raised (not unduly prejudicial), granted leave for defendants to file the Ip 6th affirmation and retrospective leave for Nie 2nd and 3rd affirmations, but refused plaintiff's Amendment Summons because the proposed amendments represented a fundamental and inadequately particularised change of case (retraction of prior positive case on AUD16.3m) that would unfairly prejudice defendants and fail the pleadings discipline re…
12 Jan 2012

MIMI KAR KEE WONG HUNG v. SEVERN VILLA LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

MIMI KAR KEE WONG HUNG v. SEVERN VILLA LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2192/2011

The Court held the trial judge did not err in finding Ng III and Ng IV were factual accounts and not expert opinion, and that he properly exercised his case management discretion in refusing wholesale further discovery or to require removal of redactions; accordingly there was no reasonable prospect of success on appeal and leave to appeal was refused.
17 Nov 2009

CHOW FU HSIEN v. K VISION INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT (HK) LTD

Citation

CHOW FU HSIEN v. K VISION INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT (HK) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2884/2004

The court accepted and adopted the plaintiff's accountant expert Mr Tam's valuation that HK$142,289,710.94 represented the defendant's net sales proceeds after project costs, deducted a tax provision of RMB27,459,585 (equivalent HK$34,324,481.25) leaving net proceeds HK$107,965,229.69, awarded the plaintiff 35% thereof (HK$37,787,830.40) with interest from 26 October 1995 to 19 July 2007 at HSBC prime and thereafter at judgment rate, and declared the plaintiff beneficially entitled to 35% of the specified property rights and 26.7% of the net asset value of Beijing K Vision (as reserved pendin…
26 May 2009

HKSAR v. LAM SING KEUNG alias STEVE

Citation

HKSAR v. LAM SING KEUNG alias STEVE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC220/2008

The Court held the conviction safe because the totality of evidence — matching invoice amount to salary outlays, traces of PCCW funds to Baker Tilly and to the salary recipient, the applicant's role in drafting and authorising the debit note and payment, absence of supporting audit documentation, and prosecution expert evidence — justified the inference that Exhibit P3 was a false representation and that the applicant conspired dishonestly to defraud PCCW; credibility findings and documentary inferences by the trial judge were not displaced on appeal.
13 Jun 2005

CHAN CHUNG WAI AND OTHERS v. CHEUNG WAI PUI AND OTHERS

Citation

CHAN CHUNG WAI AND OTHERS v. CHEUNG WAI PUI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA8721/1996

Master held the court had jurisdiction to grant interim payment in a derivative action and exercised discretion to order payment into the 8th defendant's account with plaintiffs as signatory; accepted plaintiffs' expert methodology and 27.02% gross profit ratio because defendants failed to produce cost and transactional records and thus failed to discharge burden to account; rejected double‑counting objection on the facts and accepted inclusion of goodwill; ordered interim payment of HK$10,170,083 and directed further disclosure and inquiry as per the consent judgment.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHAN KON FUNG v. GALLOP PIONEER LTD AND ANOTHER

MIMI KAR KEE WONG HUNG v. SEVERN VILLA LTD AND OTHERS

CHOW FU HSIEN v. K VISION INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT (HK) LTD

HKSAR v. LAM SING KEUNG alias STEVE

CHAN CHUNG WAI AND OTHERS v. CHEUNG WAI PUI AND OTHERS