Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Remedies - damages

Legal area

Court

2 Apr 2025

SHE CHIN PANG, father and next friend of SHE CHING (a minor) v. THE KARATEDO FEDERATION OF HONG KONG, CHINA LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1345
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA988/2019

The Policy was validly passed procedurally but its substance exceeded the Federation's powers and was ultra vires the Federation's object, was unreasonable and capricious in breach of express and implied terms of the Articles and contrary to public policy (including denial of opportunity to be heard); accordingly the Policy is void and the Federation is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for losses caused by enforcement of the Policy.
1 Mar 2023

葉黎穩對香港政府 [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 661
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL227/2023

The permission application was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify specific statutory provisions, did not provide any adequate justification for extension of time, advanced no legal or factual basis for alleged Basic Law breaches or for the large damages claim, and the proposed judicial review disclosed no arguable ground; accordingly leave was refused.
28 Jan 2021

ARNOLD ROBERT LTD v. GLORIOUS MOTORS LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCA 126
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV568/2018

Clause 11.11, read objectively against the factual matrix, referred to the HGTE handling package actually present and did not require all possible HGTE packages; the defendant therefore was not entitled to terminate or demand installation of further HGTE features. The Handwritten Clause only covered defects going beyond ordinary wear and tear; the defendant failed to prove those defects in the absence of expert evidence. Further, because the defendant terminated citing other contractual provisions in its termination letter, it could not rely on the Handwritten Clause later under the Glencore…
5 Aug 2016

GUAN ZONGQING also known as KWAN CHUNG HING v. KWAN CHUNG KIN

Citation

GUAN ZONGQING also known as KWAN CHUNG HING v. KWAN CHUNG KIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1728/2014

The Deed of Gift unambiguously established a trust in favour of five adult beneficiaries; the defendant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he acquired the property beneficially by paying $130,000 or that the deed was procured by mistake, misrepresentation or undue influence, and accordingly the defendant, having sold the trust property and used the proceeds for himself, breached his fiduciary duties; plaintiff entitled to one fifth of sale proceeds ($1,049,400).
11 Mar 2011

JOBE EBOU AND ANOTHER v. MUSE PRODUCITON LTD

Citation

JOBE EBOU AND ANOTHER v. MUSE PRODUCITON LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA15/2010

Clauses 1.5 and 1.8 require mutual agreement for changes to the performance schedule and, read with clause 8.2, the right to 'amend' show content and schedule does not permit unilateral cancellation of performances that would prejudice the performer's remunerative entitlement; the Defendant could not unilaterally cancel the scheduled August Saturday shows and the Appellant was entitled to damages for four cancelled Saturday performances totalling HK$10,000; costs of the appeal ordered nisi.
10 Apr 2008

TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. LI SING CHOI AND ANOTHER

Citation

TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. LI SING CHOI AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1297/2004

The judge held the Defence and Counterclaim disclosed no reasonable defence because the Defendants failed to plead facts constituting the alleged implied term or that they made requisitions, failed to identify or support any actionable misrepresentation, and had not exercised rescission but elected to wait; accordingly the Defence and Counterclaim were struck out and judgment entered for the Plaintiff for damages to be assessed.
27 Jun 1996

WONG PEI CHUN AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

WONG PEI CHUN AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP965/1996

The June 1961 letters amounted to a solemn governmental promise that granted the residents present then a personal, non‑transferable legal right/licence to occupy Rennie’s Mill buildings indefinitely; issuing Notices to Quit in breach of those promises constituted an abuse of power amenable to judicial review, but given redevelopment and statutory functions the appropriate remedy is damages rather than quashing the Notices to Quit; entitlement to damages is limited to those who were residents in 1961 and still reside there.
23 May 1989

MAURIELLO (HONG KONG) LTD. v. JULIE CHEN SOO LEE t/a ROHEMIAN SHOP

Citation

MAURIELLO (HONG KONG) LTD. v. JULIE CHEN SOO LEE t/a ROHEMIAN SHOP
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7088/1987

Plaintiff failed to prove the existence of the alleged exclusive supply contract or of any dishonest, underhand or deliberate misuse by the defendant of confidential customer lists or other protectable information; only customer lists were protectable but there was no evidence the defendant took or used them dishonestly, therefore all claims failed.
29 Apr 1978

HOWARD WILLIAM BURDETT v. EMSWORTH LTD

Citation

HOWARD WILLIAM BURDETT v. EMSWORTH LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3546/1977

On the facts the Court found that Emsworth (owned by a founding director and creditor) acquired more than mere production assets: continuity of product, location, some workforce, moulds and management meant a going concern was effectively transferred without the prescribed notice under section 3; the transfer fell within the Ordinance and plaintiff was entitled to judgment for the loss of his hull valued at HK$200,000 plus costs.