Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Repayment of debt

Legal area

Court

4 Nov 2011

T v. SHIU WAI TUEN

Citation

T v. SHIU WAI TUEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV255/2010

Leave to appeal was granted as of right under s22(1)(a) in respect of the dismissed HK$17.8 million repayment claim; leave under s22(1)(b) was refused because the other issues raised were fact‑specific and not questions of general or public importance; the applications for stay of execution and continuation of the Mareva injunction and lis pendens were dismissed for lack of exceptional circumstances and lack of prospects of success; conditional security of HK$400,000 was ordered to be paid into court within 42 days.
9 Dec 2010

DIANOOR INTERNATIONAL LTD v. AIYER VEMBU SUBRAMANIAM

Citation

DIANOOR INTERNATIONAL LTD v. AIYER VEMBU SUBRAMANIAM
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA806/2008

The judge accepted the plaintiff's meticulously kept accounts as accurate, found no contemporaneous accounting entry applying the US$252,500 to the defendant's current account and no credible evidence that the remittance was intended to discharge the defendant's indebtedness; accordingly the defendant remained liable for HK$1,327,345.41, the counterclaim failed, and the plaintiff was entitled to interest and costs.
21 Sept 2007

HUNG CHUNG CHI JOHNNY v. TANG JIAN

Citation

HUNG CHUNG CHI JOHNNY v. TANG JIAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3852/2004

Having considered the context, the mode of advance (funds requested and taken by the daughter), absence of direct contracting between Plaintiff and Defendant, lack of pleaded or credible evidence for the alleged Shanghai Agreement, and absence of clear intention to create legally enforceable relations, the court found no binding loan agreement to the Defendant and dismissed the claim.
4 May 2007

MA MEE KIU AND OTHERS v. CHAU CHUN YUEN

Citation

MA MEE KIU AND OTHERS v. CHAU CHUN YUEN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA495/2003

On the balance of probabilities the court found the 10-year agreement existed and discharged the 1990 buy-out insofar as it converted the instalment payments into an obligation repayable by deduction from the defendant's share of estate income for ten years; the court held the defendant remains liable to repay the indebtedness of $164,000 to the estate; the defendant is entitled to his due share of estate income from 4 April 2000; disputed assets (notably Wing Fung Laan and certain properties) were found to be gifts/beneficially owned by the defendant and not estate assets; consequential orde…

Hong Kong Case Law

T v. SHIU WAI TUEN

DIANOOR INTERNATIONAL LTD v. AIYER VEMBU SUBRAMANIAM

HUNG CHUNG CHI JOHNNY v. TANG JIAN

MA MEE KIU AND OTHERS v. CHAU CHUN YUEN