Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interest and damages

Legal area

Court

23 Sept 2022

CHAN YAT MAN v. TUNG PO (H.K.) TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE LTD

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2937
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2904/2017

On the totality of credible evidence the Court found the HK$5,000,000 was provided by the plaintiff to the company to reduce SZ Indigo account receivables (not a loan); plaintiff was an unreliable witness on key matters; key challenged documents were not authenticated by plaintiff; plaintiff's substantive claim dismissed; defendant's counterclaim allowed in part and monetary damages awarded to defendant in the sum of HK$262,155.67 with interest and costs as ordered.
3 Jul 2018

SHUN ON FINANCE LTD v. LAU LEE SUNG

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1441
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA795/2016

The defendant's allegation of fraud against the plaintiff was rejected for lack of credible, cogent evidence linking the plaintiff to the alleged misrepresentation by the intermediary; the defendant executed the Loan Agreement and Second Mortgage, received and cashed the cheque, defaulted thereafter, and under the contract the outstanding sum became immediately due; accordingly the plaintiff is entitled to judgment for the outstanding sum and contractual interest and to an order nisi for possession subject to the rights of the first mortgagee and notice requirements.
30 Nov 2011

PONY HK WORLD LTD v. VAND PETRO CHEMICALS (BVI) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

PONY HK WORLD LTD v. VAND PETRO CHEMICALS (BVI) CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA996/2010

Clause 6.2A(ii) is to be construed as treating NDRC approval as necessary; Vand failed to procure Hans/Dongguan Dongzhou to take all reasonable steps as soon as possible and thereafter omitted to act with promptness such that a continuing omission in June 2009 constituted a triggering event under clause 6.2D(2); Pony validly served the put option notice within 30 business days and the put option was validly exercised, entitling Pony to the stipulated Put Option Price.
9 Apr 2009

CHAN SZE SZE GABRIELLE v. TU CHRISTOPHER

Citation

CHAN SZE SZE GABRIELLE v. TU CHRISTOPHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2125/2006

Plaintiff was not a money lender and the loan was enforceable; Clause 3.2 was rectified (deleted) to reflect the parties' true intention; defendant breached the exclusive agency by consigning the paintings to Christies and denying access; judgment entered for plaintiff for HK$3,000,000 with contractual interest and counterclaim dismissed; plaintiff entitled to damages for breach and costs.
8 May 2007

WONG YIN KAU v. LAW YIU WING

Citation

WONG YIN KAU v. LAW YIU WING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA468/2006

The judge accepted the plaintiff's documentary and witness evidence (cheques, spreadsheet, PW2 and PW3, bank records) and rejected the defendants' smuggling scheme and their witnesses as not credible; because the plaintiff proved the debts and agreed interest, judgment was entered for the plaintiff for the specified sums and interest and the illegality defence was not upheld on the evidence.
1 Apr 2004

NEW WORLD DEVELOPMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. SUN HUNG KAI SECURITIES LTD

Citation

NEW WORLD DEVELOPMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. SUN HUNG KAI SECURITIES LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3191/1999

The court found an enforceable oral agreement from April 1990 (varied in 1991 and June 1992) obliging SHKS to contribute proportionately to land cost, rights issue, expenses and shareholders loans when third party financing was insufficient; implied the NW/IGB financing term into the oral agreement as a matter of business efficacy; rejected SHKS's 'dai chong' limitation and its agency claim; held estoppel principles supported NW's position but primary basis was the oral contract; SHKS's June agreement counterclaim failed; judgment awarded to NW for reimbursement, interest and costs.
31 Mar 2004

PHILIP SECURITIES (HK) LTD v. CHOI BUN HUNG

Citation

PHILIP SECURITIES (HK) LTD v. CHOI BUN HUNG
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1908/2002

On the facts the court found defendant's appointment terminated effective 1 March 2001 (last working day 28 February 2001); Clause 8 is a contractual indemnity imposing primary liability on the dealer to indemnify the broker for client defaults; the indemnity did not cover interest and bank charges incurred after termination and those items were not recoverable; accordingly plaintiff entitled to principal net of payments (HK$125,704.63) and statutory interest from writ to judgment at 8% pa; costs to plaintiff.
20 Mar 1985

P.K. CHRISTIANTA (HONG KONG) LTD. v. FRANKWELL TRADING CO LTD

Citation

P.K. CHRISTIANTA (HONG KONG) LTD. v. FRANKWELL TRADING CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3135/1984

The judge found the documentary record and witness evidence established that both parties knew and intended the contract as written; the defendant's later claim of mistake was rejected because conduct (requests for extensions and lack of contemporaneous protest) and internal communications demonstrated agreement, therefore the written contract was enforceable and plaintiff was entitled to the claimed sum with interest.