Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to amend

Legal area

Court

26 Feb 2026

SAMANTHA JANE BRADLEY v. SIR ELLY KADOORIE & SONS LIMITED (FOR AND ON BEHALF OF ITSELF, ITS CURRENT AND FORMER OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS, INCLUDING ITS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, MESSRS SIMMONS & SIMMONS)

Citation

[2026] HKCFA 10
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV3/2025

The court refused to vary the order nisi to award indemnity or wider costs because the action remains extant and the Calderbank correspondence and other allegations were not relevant to the Amended Summons and ensuing appeals; accordingly the court made the order nisi absolute, limited costs to the Amended Summons and the appeals, awarded costs on the party-and-party basis (entirety at first instance, 50% in each appellate court), and left costs arising from any future amendment or the remainder of the action to the judge who will hear the amendment application.
8 Dec 2025

NORMAN GUY DONALD AND ANOTHER v. LI PAK HUEN in his capacity as executor of the estate of LI PAK WING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1064
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV137/2024

The Court was satisfied that the criteria in Order 62, rule 8B(1)(a) were met and therefore the Plaintiffs' application for a wasted costs order against the Legal Representatives should proceed to the second stage under Order 62, rule 8B(1)(b) in respect of specified applications and grounds; the Court directed the second stage to be dealt with on paper with leave for one final round of evidence and/or submissions by the Legal Representatives and reserved costs.
18 Sept 2025

CONFEDERATED ASSETS GROUP LTD (incorporated in the British Virgin Islands) AND OTHERS v. NG KWOK CHING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4368
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA188/2010

The Counterclaim was struck out because the Defendants demonstrated inordinate and inexcusable delay amounting to warehousing/Grovit abuse of the court process, causing prejudice to the Plaintiffs; accordingly it was just to exercise the court's discretion to strike out and to dismiss the Amendment Summons, with costs to the Plaintiffs.
27 Jun 2025

DLA PIPER HONG KONG (a firm) v. TSOI CHIK SANG LAWRENCE

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2721
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA446/2023

Summary judgment was appropriate because plaintiff established a prima facie claim for the taxed outstanding invoices and the defendant’s sole defence (non-delivery to him personally) was unarguable: delivery to Ms Ang was effective under express authority in the engagement letters and the defendant’s admission that invoices were delivered to Fonduet was fatal given joint retainer liability. The defendant’s counterclaim failed for lack of necessary particulars and credible evidence on misrepresentation, deceit, conspiracy and alleged champerty; proposed amendments would not produce an arguabl…
21 Mar 2025

POOSAALA RAM PRASAD father of POOSAALA RAJA RAM v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1224
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1575/2016

Short delay with no adequate explanation and proposed grounds showing no real prospect of success justified refusal to extend time; granting extension would cause prejudice to the Defendant and to the administration of justice, therefore the application was dismissed with costs to the Defendant.
15 Nov 2024

BGA HOLDINGS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) (formerly known as BEIBU GULF OCEAN SHIPPING (GROUP) LTD AND OTHERS v. CHU KONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2711
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA631/2022

The court dismissed the joinder application. Plaintiffs failed to establish that s26 of the Limitation Ordinance postponed accrual of the limitation period because the relevant knowledge was publicly available or ascertainable by June 2017 (BVI judgment and related materials) and a shareholder could have pursued derivative or direct redress; therefore the intended 12th defendant has a reasonably arguable limitation defence. Section 35 LO's relation-back rule is mandatory and, absent a demonstration that the defendant has no reasonably arguable limitation defence (or agreement/determination to…
11 Jun 2024

SO LAI SIN 對 ISS HK

Citation

[2024] HKDC 780
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1226/2023

The statement of claim was struck out and the appeal dismissed because it failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action by omitting essential particulars, the defects were irremediable given plaintiff's repeated failures to provide particulars, and the newly tendered evidence was inadmissible on appeal for being irrelevant, untimely or unreliable.
22 Mar 2024

LI NGAN KWAN AND ANOTHER v. GAO LI HUI AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCA 298
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV187/2023

The Court held the plaintiffs to be the overall winners because the allowed amendments concerned multiple core causes of action and common factual matters; an issue-based approach was inappropriate given the inter-relatedness of the proposed amendments. Consequently the Court awarded the plaintiffs two-thirds of the costs of CAMP 35/2022 and CACV 187/2023, made no order as to costs of the EOT Summons, ordered costs of and occasioned by the amendments to be paid by the 1st defendant (and, where applicable, other defendants), and varied the Judge's costs order below allocating specific heads of…
22 Dec 2023

MASON GROUP HOLDINGS LTD formerly known as MASON FINANCIAL HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER v. TAM JOSEPH WING ON AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3305
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1114/2021

The claim against the 4th Defendant was struck out and the action dismissed as against him because the pleaded particulars failed to disclose any overt act by Hau demonstrating he entered into or implemented the alleged conspiratorial agreement; the Plaintiffs’ Subscription‑Proceeds‑Origin allegations were illogical and unsustainable; the defects were incurable by the proposed amendments; consequently there was no reasonable cause of action of unlawful means conspiracy against Hau.
12 Oct 2023

WAI NAM ENGINEERING LTD v. NGA LUEN CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1447
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1806/2021

The appeal is dismissed because the defendant provided a credible explanation that it acted in good faith in withdrawing admissions, the re‑amendments disclose triable issues with a reasonable prospect of success as to liability and quantum of additional works, and any prejudice to the plaintiff could be compensated by costs; accordingly the defendant was entitled to re‑amend and the plaintiff must be granted leave to re‑amend its reply within 28 days and pay the defendant's appeal costs (certificate for one counsel).