Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Illegality under statute

  • 19 Nov 2003

    JEANNY LIE v. BANK OF CHINA, SINGAPORE BRANCH

    Citation
    JEANNY LIE v. BANK OF CHINA, SINGAPORE BRANCH
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCSD24/2003

    The applications were dismissed because the illegality claim lacked substance given the running account nature of the facilities and the ACU exemption from 9 March 1984 (so indebtedness continued lawfully), the discovery application was a fishing expedition unsupported by evidence, undue influence was not established nor was the bank on inquiry or shown to have an agent in the influencer, and the Indonesian land is third‑party property not security of the applicants under the rules; accordingly the statutory demands should stand.

  • 19 Nov 2003

    WILLIAM WANG v. BANK OF CHINA, SINGAPORE BRANCH

    Citation
    WILLIAM WANG v. BANK OF CHINA, SINGAPORE BRANCH
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCSD23/2003

    The setting-aside applications were dismissed because the illegality challenge was speculative and unsupported by evidence and, in any event, continuation of running ACU facilities and the operation of s.69A rendered the contested indebtedness lawful; the undue influence claim lacked substance because the bank had no actual or constructive notice and the debtor was not shown to be the bank's agent; the Indonesian land was third-party property and not a security of the guarantors for BR r.48(5)(c) purposes; discovery was rightly refused as a fishing expedition.

  • 19 Nov 2003

    JOHN WANG v. BANK OF CHINA, SINGAPORE BRANCH

    Citation
    JOHN WANG v. BANK OF CHINA, SINGAPORE BRANCH
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCSD22/2003

    Applicants failed to show substantial legal or factual grounds: the illegality claim was speculative and unsupported by evidence and in any event continuing running facilities meant s.69A exempted post‑March 1984 credit so guarantees remained enforceable; discovery application was rightly characterised as fishing; Indonesian land is third‑party property not security of the applicants for BR r.44/48 purposes; undue influence was not established nor was the bank on inquiry or shown to have an agent relationship with the influencer; therefore the statutory demands were properly dismissed.

  • 19 Apr 2002

    YIP ALICE AND OTHERS v. WONG SHUN

    Citation
    YIP ALICE AND OTHERS v. WONG SHUN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA12614/1999

    The 1st and 2nd Agreements were management contracts that created only contractual licences (not leases) because they expressly reserved possession to the plaintiffs and denied creation of any tenancy; there was no proven misrepresentation or reliance that would discharge the 2nd Agreement; the agreements were not rendered illegal by CLO/LMPO as they did not purport to confer exclusive possession or contravene legislative intent; Wong repudiated the 2nd Agreement by ceasing payments and plaintiffs were entitled to rescind, recover damages of HKD 1,470,000 and obtain possession, with mesne pro…