Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Partial judgment

Legal area

Court

9 Dec 2010

DRAGON PEARL NIGHT CLUB RESTAURANT LTD v. LEUNG WAN KEE SHIPYARD LTD

Citation

DRAGON PEARL NIGHT CLUB RESTAURANT LTD v. LEUNG WAN KEE SHIPYARD LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA889/2010

As a matter of construction of the written Agreement (considering CIF delivery terms, reservation of documents/seatrials, risk retention/insurance obligation, and the scheme of instalments), property in the vessel remained with Leung Wan Kee until completion and delivery in Hong Kong; Leung Wan Kee therefore possessed a common law and statutory lien limited to the 5th instalment and a statutory right to sell; accordingly Dragon Pearl's applications for delivery up and interim injunction failed and were dismissed, the striking out application failed, Dragon Pearl was granted unconditional leav…
9 Dec 2010

LEUNG WAN KEE SHIPYARD LTD v. DRAGON PEARL NIGHT CLUB RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEUNG WAN KEE SHIPYARD LTD v. DRAGON PEARL NIGHT CLUB RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1288/2010

On construction of the Agreement (CIF delivery, seller retention of risk and conditions including sea trials and delivery of documents), the court held property in the vessel remained with Leung Wan Kee until completion and delivery; Leung Wan Kee also possessed a common law and statutory lien (limited to the 5th instalment) which was not lost by its conduct; accordingly delivery/injunction and striking out applications failed and Dragon Pearl was allowed unconditional leave to defend the claim for unpaid instalments.
1 Sept 2009

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. LAU FOOK KEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. LAU FOOK KEUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1520/2005

None of the defendants demonstrated an arguable proprietary interest in the $2.5 million: the 1st Defendants' claims were personal, the 3rd Defendant as shareholder had no proprietary claim in the funds, and the 2nd Defendant's asserted 50% interest was inadequately pleaded and undermined by a waiver; allegations of illegality or fraud were irrelevant to the interlocutory determination, so the Plaintiffs' application was allowed.
1 Sept 2009

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN FOR PING STEVEN AND OTHERS

Citation

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN FOR PING STEVEN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1521/2005

None of the defendants demonstrated an arguable proprietary interest traceable into the $2.5 million; the 2nd Defendant's pleaded waiver undermined its alleged 50% interest; allegations of illegality and fraud were irrelevant to the interlocutory determination of the proper destination of the stakeholder funds; therefore the plaintiffs' application was allowed and the stakeholder funds were to be paid to the plaintiffs.
1 Sept 2009

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1517/2005

None of the Defendants demonstrated an arguable proprietary interest in the $2.5 million held by the stakeholder; allegations of illegality or fraud were irrelevant to the interlocutory determination of the funds' destination, therefore the Plaintiffs' application for payment of the stakeholder funds succeeds.
1 Sept 2009

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN WAI MING AND OTHERS

Citation

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN WAI MING AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1519/2005

None of the Defendants established an arguable proprietary interest in the $2.5 million held by the solicitors; the 2nd Defendant's asserted 50% interest was unparticularised and undermined by a signed waiver; allegations of illegality and fraud were irrelevant to the immediate question of entitlement to the stakeholder funds; accordingly the Plaintiffs' application for payment was allowed and partial judgment granted.
1 Sept 2009

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN KAR FAI AND OTHERS

Citation

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN KAR FAI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1518/2005

None of the Defendants established an arguable proprietary interest in the $2.5 million: the 1st Defendants' claims are purely personal; the 3rd Defendant as shareholder has no direct interest in the funds; the 2nd Defendant's asserted 50% interest was unparticularised and undermined by a document waiving interest; allegations of illegality or fraud were irrelevant to the immediate question of entitlement, therefore the Plaintiffs' application to have the monies paid to them succeeded.
17 Dec 2008

DBS BANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. YAP BOH GEE AND ANOTHER

Citation

DBS BANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. YAP BOH GEE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2590/2007

The court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal, upheld the master's decision to enter partial judgment for HK$106,500 and to grant defendants unconditional leave to defend the remainder, and ordered that costs of the appeal (including costs of submissions on costs) be in the cause.