Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Tort of intimidation

Legal area

Court

25 Jul 2024

LI CHUN PONG RAYMOND v. LI MAGGIE HANG YUNG

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1211
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ367/2020

Judge rejected plaintiff's evidence as unreliable and accepted defendant's evidence and contemporaneous documentation showing parties held property as tenants in common in equal shares; however defendant's tort claims were dismissed on procedural grounds because particulars required by pleading rules were not pleaded despite evidence suggesting wrongdoing; accordingly declaration of 50/50 beneficial ownership granted and sale ordered under Partition Ordinance; costs ordered as no order due to misconduct and drafting failures by both parties.
30 Aug 2022

MTM LAB JAPAN LTD AND OTHERS v. ABACUS LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKDC 917
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1991/2022

There is a serious question to be tried that defendants (or their agents) perpetrated harassing and intimidating acts; plaintiffs offered an adequate cross-undertaking and no convincing evidence was shown that fortification was required; the balance of convenience favoured granting an interlocutory injunction in the terms of the defendants' prior undertaking to prevent further harassment pending trial.
5 Feb 2016

LAW KA YAN THOMPSON v. HO KANG WING

Citation

LAW KA YAN THOMPSON v. HO KANG WING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1926/2015

The judge found the plaintiff had established a serious question to be tried that the defendant engaged a debt collector whose threats amounted to intimidation; accordingly the ex parte injunction was continued until trial but its scope was narrowed because the plaintiff lacked locus standi to seek protection for certain non-family individuals; adjustments to specific addresses and a costs nisi order were made.
28 Mar 1996

YUM MOR LIN v. LI CHOW LAN AND OTHERS

Citation

YUM MOR LIN v. LI CHOW LAN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3921/1995

On the balance of probabilities there was no agreement that Madam Li loaned Madam Yum HK$800,000; the disputed memorandum was signed without explanation and did not create the asserted loan obligation; the purported board meetings and share transfers were invalid (no proper notice and transferee not registered); Mr Wong, Madam Li and Mr Lee committed trespass and intimidation against Madam Yum's de facto business and are liable for the losses; aggravated/exemplary damages of HK$100,000 are appropriate to punish and deter; costs awarded to Madam Yum.

Hong Kong Case Law

LI CHUN PONG RAYMOND v. LI MAGGIE HANG YUNG

MTM LAB JAPAN LTD AND OTHERS v. ABACUS LTD AND ANOTHER

LAW KA YAN THOMPSON v. HO KANG WING

YUM MOR LIN v. LI CHOW LAN AND OTHERS