Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Ratification by conduct

Legal area

Court

23 Jan 2025

LIP CHUNG SHEK v. LEE WAI KWAN EDMUND

Citation

[2025] HKDC 103
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4867/2023

The defendant's duress/misrepresentation case lacked requisite particulars and was affirmatively undermined by his conduct (sworn declaration and periodic repayments); however disputes over historical payments and the relationship with a third party raise genuine triable issues on calculation of indebtedness; therefore conditional leave to defend granted subject to payment into court of HK$1,480,700 within 28 days and Master's order set aside.
19 Sept 2014

NICE & WELL LTD v. FU MEE YUK SHIRLEY

Citation

NICE & WELL LTD v. FU MEE YUK SHIRLEY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV20/2011

The trial judge's detailed findings accepting the defendant's evidence that repayments and cheque withdrawals were made with the knowledge and agreement of the co‑shareholder/director were not shown to be plainly wrong on appeal; accordingly there was no breach of fiduciary duty or misappropriation, and under s168BI the member who obtained leave (Mr Leung) acted not in good faith and without reasonable grounds so costs were properly ordered against him personally.
23 May 2003

HALCROW CHINA LTD v. UTEC LTD

Citation

HALCROW CHINA LTD v. UTEC LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6319/2002

The court held that the defendant produced no credible triable issue: payments and conduct (including engagement with its accountants and confirmation correspondence) established that the defendant accepted liability or ratified the agreement despite the disputed signature; therefore summary judgment for the plaintiff was properly entered and the appeal was dismissed.
11 Jun 2002

PROGRESSIVE FOUNDATION LTD. v. LING KAI FUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

PROGRESSIVE FOUNDATION LTD. v. LING KAI FUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA251/2000

The judge accepted the Plaintiff's evidence that Chun provided the $100,000 cheque as security and that Lai paid $100,000 in cash on 13 September 1999; found the Defendants had affirmed the Formal Agreement by conduct (allowing management participation, opening joint accounts and paying management fees) and later repudiated it by diverting receipts and evicting the Plaintiff; therefore the Plaintiff was entitled to recover the full purchase price and 50% of profits for the period claimed and the Defendants' counterclaims failed.

Hong Kong Case Law

LIP CHUNG SHEK v. LEE WAI KWAN EDMUND

NICE & WELL LTD v. FU MEE YUK SHIRLEY

HALCROW CHINA LTD v. UTEC LTD

PROGRESSIVE FOUNDATION LTD. v. LING KAI FUNG AND ANOTHER