Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Preliminary issues trial

Legal area

Court

12 Feb 2026

ZHENG TING (鄭汀) v. CHINA STEM CELLS (EAST) COMPANY LIMITED

Citation

[2026] HKCFA 8
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV145/2025

On the evidential record the judge permissibly found, on objective evidence and inherent probabilities, that the impugned transfer, allotment and appointment documents were backdated and thus void for want of authority; alternatively, even if created earlier, the same acts breached directors' fiduciary duties and were voidable; those conclusions were unimpeachable and the leave application raised no reasonably arguable point of general importance, therefore leave was refused.
12 Feb 2026

CHEN BING CHUEN ALBERT (陳炳泉) v. CHINA STEM CELLS (SOUTH) COMPANY LIMITED (INCORPORATED IN THE BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS)

Citation

[2026] HKCFA 8
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV139/2025

The Judge properly assessed credibility and ancillary factual matters necessary to resolve the agreed preliminary issues; objective evidence established the Impugned Documents were backdated and therefore void for want of authority and, alternatively, even if executed earlier they were procured in breach of directors' fiduciary duties and voidable; the proposed leave questions were case‑specific and not reasonably arguable, so leave to appeal was refused.
12 Feb 2026

ZHENG TING (鄭汀) v. CHINA STEM CELLS HOLDINGS LIMITED

Citation

[2026] HKCFA 8
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV143/2025

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed questions were case-specific and not reasonably arguable: the judge lawfully considered collateral evidence only insofar as necessary to assess credibility and to decide whether the impugned documents were backdated or procured in breach of fiduciary duty; objective evidence supported the backdating finding (rendering the documents void) and, alternatively, the breach finding (rendering them voidable), disposing of the case; no legal error warranting leave was shown.
12 Feb 2026

CHEN BING CHUEN ALBERT (陳炳泉) v. CHINA STEM CELLS (EAST) COMPANY LIMITED

Citation

[2026] HKCFA 8
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV140/2025

Leave to appeal refused because the judge properly resolved issues necessary to decide the agreed preliminary issues: objective and documentary evidence supported the finding that the impugned transfers and allotments were backdated and therefore void for want of authority; alternatively, the acts constituted breaches of fiduciary duty rendering them voidable; the judge acted within scope in assessing related facts and credibility, and the applicants' grounds were not reasonably arguable.
12 Feb 2026

CHEN BING CHUEN ALBERT (陳炳泉) v. CHINA STEM CELLS HOLDINGS LIMITED

Citation

[2026] HKCFA 8
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV141/2025

Leave to appeal was refused because the trial judge permissibly considered evidence relevant to the credibility of the applicants' account and correctly found on objective evidence that the Impugned Documents were backdated and therefore void for want of authority, and alternatively that they were procured in breach of fiduciary duties making them voidable; the scope complaint and burden complaints were unfounded and the proposed questions were case-specific and not reasonably arguable.
21 May 2025

CHINA STEM CELLS (EAST) COMPANY LTD v. CHEN BING CHUEN ALBERT AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCA 326
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV92/2024

The Court held the judge did not err: the objective facts and credibility findings supported the conclusion that the impugned transfer, allotment and appointment documents were created on or after 29 September 2022 and backdated, rendering them void for want of authority and/or voidable for breach or improper purpose; the judge was entitled to consider related factual matters (including aspects of the 2019 Security Arrangement) insofar as relevant to credibility and breach, and any mischaracterisation of evidential burden was immaterial to the outcome. Appeals dismissed.
5 May 2023

STEPHENSON HARWOOD (A FIRM) v. FANG ANKONG aka FANG AN KONG

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1230
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA191/2023

The court ordered that deponents must attend the Trial for cross-examination and that an absent deponent’s affirmation will be excluded; the Writ Action (including filing of a defence) is stayed pending judgment on the preliminary issue; a one‑day Trial was set with liberty to the defendants to seek more time after filing reply affirmations and list of issues by 25 May 2023. The orders were made because the preliminary issue is final and binding and fairness requires opportunity for oral explanation, balanced against considerations of delay and cost.
21 Mar 2023

SUN TIAN GANG AND ANOTHER v. CHANGCHUN HIGH & NEW TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT PARENT CO AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 819
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA179/2015

The court found the Plaintiff succeeded on all issues decided at the October 2018 hearing and the Defendants' grounds of opposition did not justify departure from the normal rule; accordingly the costs of the October 2018 hearing were awarded to the Plaintiff with a certificate for two counsel, to be summarily assessed and payable forthwith.
21 Apr 2004

LEE YIU KWAN v. TING YIN WAH

Citation

LEE YIU KWAN v. TING YIN WAH
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV31/2003

The Court allowed the appeals, set aside the District Court judge's orders and remitted the cases for re-trial because the judge improperly ordered trial of preliminary legal issues without properly formulating them or giving parties a fair opportunity to address issues, several disputed matters involved interwoven factual and legal questions (including applicability of the Money Lenders Ordinance s.23 proviso and statutory interpretation of the corrupt practices provisions) unsuitable for determination as preliminary legal issues, and the judge applied an incorrect/repealed statutory version…