Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Transfer to high court

Legal area

Court

19 Oct 2023

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (HONG KONG) LTD v. KHANDURI SANJAY

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1446
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1068/2022

The Amended Counterclaim was struck out and the appeal dismissed because the PDPO claim lacked pleaded loss and causal link and therefore could not succeed, and alleged breaches of the Banking Ordinance and HKMA guidance are regulatory matters that do not confer a private right of action; consequently the reliefs sought were legally unviable and transfer to the High Court was unwarranted.
7 Aug 2020

LYYC v. CHL and CSMS, the Executrices of the Estate of CGSK also known as CSKG, deceased

Citation

[2020] HKFC 158
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP223/2017

The court will determine the Applicant's interim maintenance application first by paper disposal because the interim financial support can and should be resolved promptly and efficiently; after that determination the parties will reconsider whether an FDR is appropriate and, if not resolved, the matter will be transferred to the High Court. Costs follow the event and an order nisi for costs in favour of the Applicant is appropriate.
1 Feb 2019

FILBERT TERRENCE KIRK v. BIG BLUE RESOURCES LTD

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 285
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA27/2015

The Presiding Officer's order was set aside because he erred in law and in reasoning by failing to investigate fully whether a contract of employment existed, the capacity in which the Claimant was engaged (executive v managing director), and the validity/effect of any assignment; it was erroneous to hold both defendants jointly and severally liable without proper findings; the proper remedy was to remit the whole case to the Labour Tribunal for retrial before a different presiding officer with directions not to be bound by the previous factual findings and to consider transfer to the High Co…
8 Sept 2017

N v. W

Citation

N v. W
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC5026/2015

The court granted the transfer of the s17 application to the Court of First Instance because the matter raised substantial points of law (notably ex turpi causa in light of Patel v Mirza), involved allegations of fraud and other civil/criminal ramifications, potentially required expert evidence, and concerned a significant quantum (circa US$18 million); accordingly the High Court is a more appropriate forum. Costs were ordered to follow the event on a party and party basis, taxed if not agreed.
5 Aug 2013

WAN CHI HING v. STRONG MASTER CORPORATION LTD

Citation

WAN CHI HING v. STRONG MASTER CORPORATION LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1497/2006

Where a plaintiff's claim as properly framed on available material at interlocutory stage exceeds the District Court's statutory monetary jurisdiction and there is no abuse or conclusive contradiction, section 41(1) of the District Court Ordinance mandates transfer of the action to the Court of First Instance; accordingly the Main Actions (and related Harbour Base Actions to be heard together) were transferred upon plaintiffs' showing and absence of mala fides.
5 Aug 2013

SUPER EASTERN LTD v. HARBOUR BASE PROPERTIES LTD

Citation

SUPER EASTERN LTD v. HARBOUR BASE PROPERTIES LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1365/2006

Because the claimed quantum as framed by the plaintiffs exceeded the District Court's monetary jurisdiction and there was no suggestion of abuse or mala fides and nothing conclusively contradicted the claim at interlocutory stage, the District Court was required under s41(1) DCO to transfer the Main Actions (and, on application, the related Harbour Base Actions) to the Court of First Instance.
24 Jan 2003

ALI A.H. SALEH v. FALCON INSURANCE CO (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

ALI A.H. SALEH v. FALCON INSURANCE CO (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6261/2002

Because the plaintiff is ordinarily resident outside the jurisdiction and has failed to demonstrate a high probability of success — his right of action is tenuous due to lack of pleaded or evidenced assignment and absence of an established insurable interest at the time of loss — it is just in all the circumstances to order security for costs; security is to be assessed on the High Court costs scale given the related High Court action and proposed transfer.
1 Feb 2002

H v. H

Citation

H v. H
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC7173/2000

Having weighed the parties’ respective standards of living, income and capital, and the wife’s spending and disclosure, the court awarded interim maintenance of HK$250,000 per month from 1 February 2002 while continuing provision of house, staff and utilities by the husband; refused backdating; adjourned the legal costs element sine die by consent; and ordered transfer of the proceedings to the Court of First Instance due to the need for superior court consideration of issues raised by White/Cowan.
6 Jun 2001

Lam Suk Fun v. Choy Ying Keung Kenny

Citation

Lam Suk Fun v. Choy Ying Keung Kenny
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP3678/2000

The judge exercised discretion after balancing prejudice and proportionality: because the plaintiff's claim is modest (HK$162,000), urgent, and designed for summary resolution, and transfer would cause undue delay, the application to transfer/adjourn was refused; third party proceedings were adjourned until after the vendor and purchaser summons hearing to protect the summary remedy and avoid disproportionate escalation.
9 Aug 1985

LEE WING FUNG v. LEE WING CHIU

Citation

LEE WING FUNG v. LEE WING CHIU
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3357/1985

Set-off and counterclaims unrelated or unliquidated cannot defeat an action on a bill of exchange in the absence of fraud, invalidity or an ascertained partial failure of consideration; a District Judge may enter summary judgment under Rule 27 when, after hearing and investigation, no reasonable defence remains; however, equitable relief in the form of a stay of execution may be granted for a specific portion ($25,000) held in trust for a third party to allow pursuit of related High Court proceedings.