Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Review date

  • 15 Sept 1983

    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA4315/1983

    Facility Letters were construed as offering term loans subject to an express reservation allowing the lenders to reduce, withdraw or call the facilities (post-review they became repayable on demand); no implied term prevented demand or required notice; initiating the prior tort action did not amount to an irrevocable election to repudiate the loan contracts; triable issues existed as to loans made for purchase of Paliburg shares and as to consideration for certain guarantees, so unconditional leave to defend was required in those actions; where no triable issue existed the plaintiffs were ent…

  • 15 Sept 1983

    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA4322/1983

    Facility Letters were construed as lending documents subject to an express reservation allowing the lender to reduce or withdraw the facility and to call the loans after the review date; no implied term prevented demand without notice; the earlier fraud action did not constitute an irrevocable election repudiating the loan contracts; triable issues existed concerning loans made for Paliburg share purchases and consideration for guarantees, so unconditional leave to defend was required in specified actions; where no triable issue existed summary judgment was entered for plaintiffs for the prin…

  • 15 Sept 1983

    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA4313/1983

    Facility Letters were to be construed as granting term loans subject to a reserved right to reduce or withdraw at lender's discretion such that loans could be called in on demand after review dates; no implication of terms preventing calls or giving borrowers a right to repayment only upon project success; earlier fraud proceedings did not constitute an irrevocable election to repudiate; triable issues existed concerning the Paliburg share transactions and consideration for certain guarantees; summary judgment awarded where no triable issue and leave to defend granted where genuine issues rai…

  • 15 Sept 1983

    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA6511/1983

    Facility Letters were contracts that reserved the lenders a continuing discretion to reduce or withdraw facilities and did not create an absolute obligation to maintain loans to the review date; therefore many repayment claims were not premature; defendants failed to establish an election by plaintiffs to repudiate the loans; triable issues existed as to loans made in connection with Paliburg shares and as to consideration for many guarantees; accordingly summary judgment was granted for principal sums in specified actions where no triable issue arose and unconditional leave to defend was giv…

  • 15 Sept 1983

    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LLOYDS BANK INTERNATONAL LTD AND ANOTHER v. DERICOURT INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA6512/1983

    On construction the Facility Letters created term loans subject to an express reservation that the lender could reduce or withdraw the facility at its sole discretion and the review date did not preclude the lenders from calling the loans; alleged implied terms to prevent demand or require notice were inconsistent with express terms and not implied; the plaintiffs' concurrent tort claims did not amount to an irrevocable election repudiating the loans; triable issues existed as to loans used to buy Paliburg shares and as to consideration for guarantees; where no triable issue exists the court…