Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Limitation

Legal area

Court

14 May 2026

ZHU BEI v. SOUTH CHINA SECURITIES LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2798
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA494/2023

The court found the plaintiff did give instructions but those instructions objectively required a low-risk government-backed investment (not a guaranteed no-risk product); the Bonds were not contrary to those instructions; the 1st defendant acted as a custodian only and owed no advisory or fiduciary duty to recommend the Bonds; the PI Declaration and Declaration of Receipt were binding; accordingly the alleged breaches, misrepresentations and conspiracy were not made out and the claim failed.
30 Apr 2026

BUILD KING CONSTRUCTION LTD formerly known as KADEN CONSTRUCTION LTD v. SAM WOO BORE PILE FOUNDATION LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2270
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT4/2023

The proposed amendment was dismissed because it did not plead a true abatement defence: it failed to allege diminution in value of the contracted work ('the thing itself') and instead advanced claims framed as overpayment/unjust enrichment and breach requiring recoupment, lacked requisite particulars, was prolix and inconsistent, and thus was legally defective and bound to fail; accordingly leave to re‑amend was refused and costs awarded to the Plaintiff.
22 Apr 2026

DIMENSIONAL DEVELOPMENTS LTD v. ARCHID GARMENT FACTORY LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2166
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP939/2025

Although some pleaded claims presented a serious question to be tried in a narrow legal sense, the court refused leave because the proposed litigation was not in the Company’s interests: pursuing the misappropriation and mortgage claims risked commercial harm given the possibility that the Company is beneficial owner of the disputed properties and therefore better off if litigation is not pursued; the Cambodian Property issue was resolved by respondents’ undertaking to sell; the continued employment claim rests on commercial judgment and lacked a properly pleaded serious issue; and the select…
26 Mar 2026

CHINA ENERGY DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD v. YEUNG KA SING, CARSON

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1693
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA784/2021

On the balance of probabilities the Defendant executed the two guarantees; circumstantial documentary evidence, public disclosures and credibility findings outweighed the Defendant's bare denial; expert handwriting evidence did not exclude the Defendant; the instruments operated as deeds or otherwise were enforceable and the Plaintiff was entitled to recover principal, contractual interest and continuing default interest and costs (order nisi).
10 Mar 2026

NINTENDO CO., LTD v. CHEN YUAN NING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1448
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCIP56/2022

On the evidence before the court (uncontested bank disclosures, test purchases and published sales/pricing data), the court accepted plaintiff's conservative estimates and discounts, held defendants liable for copyright circumvention under s273A/B, excluded identified time-barred receipts, assessed total recoverable damages at US$8,430,242, apportioned liability for the 3DS-related head (US$673,750) such that D3 is jointly liable for US$505,312.50 and D1 and D2 jointly for the balance, ordered release of plaintiff from its undertaking, and awarded costs to plaintiff.
12 Jan 2026

SAM WOO BORE PILE FOUNDATION LTD v. NEW EDEX CONSTRUCTION LTD

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 239
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT26/2024

The contested strike‑out applications were dismissed because the matters complained of were fact‑sensitive and arguable on the pleaded case, limitation and abuse‑of‑process arguments depended on the construction and effect of alleged agreements, deficiencies of particulars should be remedied by requests rather than strike‑out, and the proposed amendments rendered strike‑out inappropriate; consequently the amendment was granted with directions and only one part of the strike‑out application was adjourned sine die with liberty to restore.
18 Dec 2025

DUBAI (INTERNATIONAL) DJIBOUTI FZE v. CHINA MERCHANTS PORT HOLDINGS COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6332
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA504/2025

The 2025 Statement of Claim was struck out because it amounted to an abuse of process: the pleaded claims are the same cause of action or substantially overlap with the 2018 Action, the New Pleas amount to further particulars rather than a distinct cause of action, DID offered no good reason to maintain a separate action and had breached the Aldi Stores guideline; accordingly the court exercised its discretionary strike-out power and dismissed the 2025 Action.
19 Nov 2025

GOLDJET DEVELOPMENT LTD v. RANDAL ALAN WHITECOTTON AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5268
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2337/2018

On the facts the Court found the 1st and 2nd Defendants were the masterminds of a planned joint enterprise that kidnapped the Plaintiff’s director and procured the coerced transfers; the transfers were made in breach of the 1st Defendant’s fiduciary duties and/or by duress; PT Soeria and the Defendants held the remaining funds on constructive trust for the Plaintiff; Plaintiff entitled to restitution of US$1,631,075, tracing, accounts, interest and costs; limitation did not bar the claim.
31 Oct 2025

ZHANG, FENGQIU v. CHAN, KA YUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5164
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA951/2023

The Mainland Judgments are final and conclusive and not impeachable for lack of service or opportunity because the PRC courts recorded non‑attendance and the 1st Defendant was afforded opportunity; the Personal Loans and Tin Fung Agreement exist based on unchallenged witness evidence and documentary receipts; the Confirmation Letter was not signed under duress; the Assignment is valid because notice was posted to the debtor's known address; accordingly judgment is entered for enforcement of the Mainland Judgments and underlying sums, including compensatory interest as awarded, totaling RMB114…
24 Oct 2025

鍾玲對星島日報出版有限公司

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5070
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI325/2024

The amended statement of claim failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action because it lacked necessary factual particulars linking the 2016 publication to any legally cognisable personal injury or loss, the claim was time‑barred under the Limitation Ordinance, and the pleadings were malicious/frivolous and an abuse of process; accordingly the claim must be struck out and the appeal dismissed, with costs awarded to the defendant.