Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Loan recovery

Legal area

Court

6 Mar 2026

SUN HUNG KAI CREDIT LTD v. TREASURE PROFIT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1313
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1201/2024

Plaintiff established a prima facie case for recovery and enforcement; defendants failed to adduce credible evidence of an extortionate transaction under s.25 MLO or of estoppel by convention because the tenancy renewal proposal was expressly rejected by plaintiff (18.06.2024 reply) and no evidence supported reasonable reliance; accordingly final judgment entered for plaintiff and costs awarded on an indemnity basis pursuant to the contractual provisions.
13 Sept 2024

CHAN WAI HON ALAN AND ANOTHER v. CHAN YUK FOEBE

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1650
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA714/2018

On the balance of probabilities the judge accepted the plaintiff's evidence and contemporaneous documentary record that the HK$20,000,000 and HK$4,200,000 transfers were loans and that the HK$15,000,000 loan remained outstanding; the defendant's alternative explanations were implausible and inconsistent with documents; further, plaintiffs did not carry on a business of money lending (no system, continuity, solicitation or advertising, several loans made at the defendant's request and some interest-free), so MLO did not bar recovery; accordingly judgment entered for plaintiffs with contractual…
13 Sept 2024

CHAN WAI HON ALAN AND ANOTHER v. CHAN YUK FOEBE

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1650
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1722/2017

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted plaintiffs’ documentary and oral evidence: the HK$20,000,000 was a loan under an oral first agreement (not a gift), the payments in 2015 related to share transactions and did not discharge the HK$15,000,000 loan, the HK$4,200,000 was advanced pursuant to an oral agreement with Alan as lender and was received (deposited into YT Chan’s account) and remains unpaid; defendant failed to prove plaintiffs were carrying on a money-lending business within s.2(1) MLO, so s.23 did not bar recovery; accordingly judgment entered for plaintiffs for stated…
24 Nov 2022

LEE CHI HANG LARRY and WONG YING KIT EDDIE, the executors of the estate of WONG WAI CHUN, deceased AND OTHERS v. WELL DONE GARMENT FACTORY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1720
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV363/2021

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal because the trial judge's factual findings — that WYW withdrew HK$6,000,000 and paid HK$4m and HK$2m in cash to WWC, that payments made to Well Done/HK Welldone (HK$2.3m and HK$1.131m) originated from that HK$6m, that HK$2.569m remained unaccounted for by WWC, and that WWC's estate had overreceived MPF/long service payment such that HK$45,994.46 was repayable — were supported by the evidence and not plainly wrong; no palpable error justified appellate intervention, so the trial orders for an account/repayment and MPF recovery stand and the appellants'…
25 Jun 2021

LEE CHI HANG AND OTHERS v. WELL DONE GARMENT FACTORY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1835
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA465/2013

On the evidence (contemporaneous documents, admissions in probate administration, credible witnesses and neutral account clerk), the 1996 allotment was valid by consent at the 1996 EGM; WC had capacity and the 2001 transfers were valid and formed part of an intentional scheme transferring assets (including Macau account funds) to WYW with knowledge or assent of WSL and WWC; the moneys allegedly loaned by WWC and WSL were in fact funded from WYW’s Macau account, so plaintiffs’ loan claims fail, save that the estate must account for an unexplained balance of HK$2,569,000; MPF overpayment of HK$…
25 May 2017

CHAN LAI KUEN 對 CHAN CHI MING

Citation

CHAN LAI KUEN 對 CHAN CHI MING
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4627/2014

The judge accepted the defendant's credible and consistent evidence that the HK$100,000 and HK$6,000 interest were repaid within a week and rejected the plaintiff's inconsistent and unreliable account; accordingly the plaintiff's claim fails and is dismissed; it was unnecessary to decide the limitation issue.
19 Feb 2013

LEE MEI KIU v. HHOME CAFÉ LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEE MEI KIU v. HHOME CAFÉ LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV122/2011

The trial judge's factual findings were amply supported by contemporaneous documentary evidence (bank deposit slips, bank statements, general ledger) and appellant's own admissions; the attempted fresh evidence did not meet Ladd v Marshall and would not have altered the outcome; appellate court will not overturn findings of fact based on re‑weighing credibility, therefore appeal dismissed.
30 Sept 2011

FOURWAY (HK) LTD v. CHINA NANTONG HARBOUR LOGISTICS LTD

Citation

FOURWAY (HK) LTD v. CHINA NANTONG HARBOUR LOGISTICS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1618/2009

The court set aside the summary judgment because the defendant's audited accounts signed by the common controller contained material features inconsistent with the plaintiff's case and therefore raised triable issues as to whether the transfers constituted a loan; however the court upheld the master's refusal to admit further late evidence because the defendant failed to show exceptional circumstances under Order 32, rule 11(4).
24 Mar 2009

何應虹 v. HANG FUNG ELECTRIC WIRE FACTORY LTD

Citation

何應虹 v. HANG FUNG ELECTRIC WIRE FACTORY LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3595/2005

Plaintiff established a prima facie case that the HK$300,000 payment was a loan used to reduce the BOC overdraft prior to mortgage redemption; the defendant's opposing evidence is largely bare assertions, internally inconsistent or shadowy and does not disclose credible triable issues; accordingly conditional leave to defend was appropriate only on payment into court of HK$300,000 within 14 days, failing which the plaintiff may enter final judgment for the amount claimed with interest and costs.
30 Jul 2007

TIANJIN JINFU EXPRESSWAY CO LTD v. LUCKY MONEY LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

TIANJIN JINFU EXPRESSWAY CO LTD v. LUCKY MONEY LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA447/2006

The board minutes of 1 March 2001 plainly record a loan by the plaintiff to the defendants in the stated sum; the respondents failed to provide positive averment or evidence to support an alternative repayment theory and did not meet the stringent Miles v Bull threshold for leave to defend; accordingly summary judgment was properly entered for the plaintiff for the amount claimed with interest at 2% above prime.