Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Hire purchase

Legal area

Court

24 Apr 2014

CP MOTORS LTD v. ON CHIT TRANSPORTATION LTD

Citation

CP MOTORS LTD v. ON CHIT TRANSPORTATION LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3655/2011

On the balance of probabilities the court found the Hitachi HPA was entered into with the defendant's consent (forging not proved), the SPA was valid and not vitiated by misrepresentation, undue influence, duress or illegality, the plaintiff failed to establish entitlement to specific performance or declaratory relief against the defendant (in part because of substitutional dealings with Golden Harbour and adequacy of damages), and the plaintiff owed the defendant HK$8,564 being miscellaneous charges forming part of the purchase price; all other claims and counterclaims failed.
23 Mar 2011

KELLAND CO LTD v. PACIFIC ACE INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

KELLAND CO LTD v. PACIFIC ACE INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCDT4160/2010

The court held that the Bailiff lawfully seized goods that were in the apparent possession of the Defendant and that the Plaintiff had a statutory right under section 99 to sell distrained goods; ownership alone did not require return of goods and no factors were shown sufficient to displace the landlord's statutory rights, therefore all claimants' claims for return were dismissed.
1 Jun 2010

GE CAPITAL (HONG KONG) LTD v. YUNDA EXPRESS LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

GE CAPITAL (HONG KONG) LTD v. YUNDA EXPRESS LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ771/2010

The summons seeking declaratory relief was adjourned sine die because the court considered the ownership declaration potentially redundant given documentary proof of title and the possession declaration required proper pleading and possibly joinder of the police; plaintiff granted liberty to restore and costs reserved.
24 Apr 2003

BLAIR ACCESSORIES (HK) LTD v. STUTTGART INTERNATIONAL MOTORS (HOLDINGS) LTD

Citation

BLAIR ACCESSORIES (HK) LTD v. STUTTGART INTERNATIONAL MOTORS (HOLDINGS) LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3678/2002

The salesperson's explicit statement that the car was manufactured in 2000 was a warranty intended to induce purchase; the statement was not shown to be fraudulent but had no adequate foundation because the true manufacture date could have been ascertained from the manufacturer, therefore Defendant liable for breach of warranty and Plaintiff entitled to damages measured by the difference between the value of a 2000 model and the actual sale proceeds plus survey costs and interest.
21 Jun 2002

EAST ASIA FINANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. LI CHOI HUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

EAST ASIA FINANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. LI CHOI HUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL80/1999

Where the finance company paid the dealer, received original vehicle registration documents and the dealings showed a sale occurred, the transaction constituted a true hire purchase transferring ownership to the finance company and was enforceable; it was not an unregistered bill of sale invalidating the agreements.
16 Jan 2002

HANG SENG FINANCE LTD. v. CHU KWOK KEUNG, THOMAS

Citation

HANG SENG FINANCE LTD. v. CHU KWOK KEUNG, THOMAS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA9889/1999

Court accepted plaintiff's unchallenged evidence that the defendant repudiated the hire purchase agreement, that the vehicle was properly repossessed and sold for the best obtainable price, and that after crediting proceeds and deductions the provable loss was HK$684,561.39; that sum is recoverable with interest from 15 July 1999 and costs of the assessment on a party and party basis.
16 Jan 2002

HANG SENG FINANCE LTD. v. TAM KIT KWONG

Citation

HANG SENG FINANCE LTD. v. TAM KIT KWONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA10530/1999

Court found the defendant repudiated the hire purchase agreement, accepted the plaintiff's loss computation and awarded net damages of HK$110,461.76, with interest at judgment rate from 23 July 1999, and costs to the plaintiff on a party-and-party basis taxed if not agreed.
16 Jan 2002

HANG SENG FINANCE LTD. v. TSANG TAT CHOW

Citation

HANG SENG FINANCE LTD. v. TSANG TAT CHOW
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7221/1999

Defendant repudiated the hire purchase agreement; plaintiff validly terminated, repossessed and sold the vehicle by proper process; the plaintiff's evidence substantiated the statutory and contractual deductions and rebate calculations, supporting an award of HK$841,168.15 plus costs and interest.
4 Sept 2000

HOI FAT CONSTRUCTION MECHANIC CO. LTD. v. LING CHI FAI

Citation

HOI FAT CONSTRUCTION MECHANIC CO. LTD. v. LING CHI FAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5066/1999

The plaintiff, having been validly assigned Dah Sing Finance's rights and having acted reasonably to mitigate loss, is entitled to recover the shortfall calculated as sums paid/contracted under the reassignment and repairs less the resale proceeds (HK$336,399.20), together with costs on an indemnity basis and interest at judgment rate.
19 Mar 1999

FAR EAST STRUCTURAL STEELWORK ENGINEERING LTD. v. REESON CRANE & ENGINEERING LTD.

Citation

FAR EAST STRUCTURAL STEELWORK ENGINEERING LTD. v. REESON CRANE & ENGINEERING LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA14006/1998

The Master’s order requiring $1.575 million paid into court was unjustified because the Plaintiff could not transfer good title during the lease term and had not shown the option was validly exercised; therefore it was not probable the Defendant would be held liable for that sum and the Defendant must be granted unconditional leave to defend.