Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Hearsay evidence weight

Legal area

Court

18 Feb 2025

FU TAT CREDIT LTD v. LAU YUNG TAI by his guardian ad litem LAU VACO AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 723
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1757/2012

The court found plaintiffs proved the loan advances and enforceability of the loan agreements and legal charges; defendants failed to establish undue influence, unconscionability, forgery, economic duress or breaches of MLO sufficient to render the agreements unenforceable; Father’s hearsay statements were given no weight and the Son was an unreliable witness; accordingly judgment entered for plaintiffs with possession and specified monetary awards and interest as set out in the orders.
18 Feb 2025

FU TAT CREDIT LTD v. LAU WAI MAN

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 723
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1773/2012

The court preferred plaintiffs' contemporaneous documentary evidence and witness testimony, found Father’s hearsay statements unreliable due to dementia and lack of cross‑examination and found the Son an incredible witness; no undue influence, no unconscionable bargain and no material breach of the Money Lenders Ordinance were established; therefore the written loan agreements and legal charges were enforceable and plaintiffs were entitled to possession orders and monetary judgments as claimed.
8 Jul 2024

TEMPOROSA, MA. CARLA ARANGOTE, THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF GUTING, JOAN SARMIENTO, DECEASED v. CHOY CHIU YEE RITA

Citation

[2024] HKDC 747
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEO13/2019

On the balance of probabilities the respondent had decided to dismiss the employee for legitimate reasons (poor performance and discovery of photos) before knowledge of the illness; contemporaneous evidence (WhatsApp, CCTV, audio) supported that reasoning; the deceased's hearsay statements and friends' accounts were given little weight; 30 April 2017 was a rest day not a sickness day and therefore s33(4B) did not apply; there was no proven harassment or discrimination on the ground of disability and no breach of the implied term; all claims dismissed.
10 Sept 2007

LOKYIU INDUSTRIES LTD T/A SILINK TRADING CO AND ANOTHER v. MERCHANDISE WORLDWIDE TRANSPORTATION LTD.

Citation

LOKYIU INDUSTRIES LTD T/A SILINK TRADING CO AND ANOTHER v. MERCHANDISE WORLDWIDE TRANSPORTATION LTD.
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3466/2005

Plaintiffs failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Missing Goods were loaded onto the aircraft and thus failed to prove defendant's liability; the court accepted the defendant's evidence that it exercised the degree of care required of a bailee and dismissed the plaintiffs' claim.

Hong Kong Case Law

FU TAT CREDIT LTD v. LAU YUNG TAI by his guardian ad litem LAU VACO AND ANOTHER

FU TAT CREDIT LTD v. LAU WAI MAN

TEMPOROSA, MA. CARLA ARANGOTE, THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF GUTING, JOAN SARMIENTO, DECEASED v. CHOY CHIU YEE RITA

LOKYIU INDUSTRIES LTD T/A SILINK TRADING CO AND ANOTHER v. MERCHANDISE WORLDWIDE TRANSPORTATION LTD.