Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Revocation of guarantee

Legal area

Court

23 Nov 2005

NEXT MAGAZINE ADVERTISING LTD v. AMERICA ADVERTISING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

NEXT MAGAZINE ADVERTISING LTD v. AMERICA ADVERTISING LTD AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4280/2004

Because the guarantees concerned divisible consideration the guarantor could revoke future liability, but revocation is effective only upon actual receipt by the creditor; the 3rd Defendant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the notices reached the Plaintiffs' mailing centre, so his revocation did not take effect and judgment was entered for the Plaintiffs.
23 Nov 2005

APPLE DAILY LTD v. AMERICA ADVERTISING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

APPLE DAILY LTD v. AMERICA ADVERTISING LTD AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4281/2004

The guarantee involved divisible consideration so the guarantor could revoke future liability, but revocation by ordinary post takes effect only on actual receipt; the 3rd Defendant failed to prove receipt on the balance of probabilities, therefore judgment entered for the Plaintiffs for the claimed sums.
31 Aug 2005

GOOD PROCESS LTD v. GRAND CHEST LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

GOOD PROCESS LTD v. GRAND CHEST LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ448/2004

The court held the 2nd defendant liable because the two letters of guarantee were continuing, entire guarantees valid until the lease expired under clause 4 and could not be unilaterally revoked; there was no credible evidence that the plaintiff agreed to set off arrears by taking chattels or licences; demands (oral communications and the formal solicitor's letter) satisfied the guarantee; therefore plaintiff was entitled to judgment for the calculated unpaid sum plus interest and costs.
23 Jan 1989

DAYS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. NATHAL KAOIDOS MODI (male) AND ANOTHER

Citation

DAYS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. NATHAL KAOIDOS MODI (male) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1041/1987

The court found on the evidence that there was no duress in the execution of the guarantee and that the purported revocation was not received until after the writ was issued; therefore the guarantee was enforceable against the second defendant and judgment was entered for the stated sum with interest and costs.
18 Jun 1986

RE KENEVA CO LTD

Citation

RE KENEVA CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP228/1986

The court held that although a contract of guarantee was identifiable, the guarantee was void because of a mistake as to the identity of the principal debtor; further, even on alternative analysis there was insufficient evidence of a fixing or estoppel that would bind the bank, and the plaintiff's application for the declaration therefore failed.
13 Jul 1981

THAI OVERSEA INVESTMENT & FINANCE CO LTD v. A. WINNER CO (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER

Citation

THAI OVERSEA INVESTMENT & FINANCE CO LTD v. A. WINNER CO (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA63/1979

The written guarantee was unambiguous and, construed by its terms, constituted a continuing guarantee; there were no credible representations limiting it to a single transaction and no revocation before the subsequent advances, therefore the 2nd defendant was liable for the outstanding $100,000 plus interest.

Hong Kong Case Law

NEXT MAGAZINE ADVERTISING LTD v. AMERICA ADVERTISING LTD AND OTHERS

APPLE DAILY LTD v. AMERICA ADVERTISING LTD AND OTHERS

GOOD PROCESS LTD v. GRAND CHEST LTD AND ANOTHER

DAYS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. NATHAL KAOIDOS MODI (male) AND ANOTHER

RE KENEVA CO LTD

THAI OVERSEA INVESTMENT & FINANCE CO LTD v. A. WINNER CO (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER