Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Trust claim

  • 27 Feb 2018

    SUPER CRUISE LTD v. COSIMO BORRELLI AND OTHERS

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 434
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1460/2013

    The Registrar held that the correct procedural framework is Order 16 r.1: the 3rd Defendant's claims are connected to the original subject matter (receivership and Share Charge indemnity) and therefore not appropriately struck out under Order 18 r.19 alone; the matters should be determined with all relevant parties and evidence, so the third parties' summons to strike out was dismissed and costs were awarded against the third parties.

  • 7 Sept 2016

    LIM YI SHENN v. WONG YUEN YEE AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LIM YI SHENN v. WONG YUEN YEE AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV55/2015

    The Court dismissed the appeal: the Group Valuation Materials were, on the evidence, projections and business plans with disclaimers and not actionable statements of existing fact; the plaintiff failed to prove he relied on any proven false factual statements or that defendants represented there would be other independent investors; the trust claim for HK$10 million and the alleged contractual terms were not established; primary findings of credibility by the trial judge were not shown to be plainly wrong, so the dismissal of the plaintiff's claims was upheld.

  • 11 Nov 2005

    LEW KEE JACK v. CHINA RAILWAY INVESTMENT (HK) LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LEW KEE JACK v. CHINA RAILWAY INVESTMENT (HK) LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2845/2003

    The court found on the balance of probabilities that Hao, representing the China Railway group, made fraudulent oral representations that induced the plaintiff to enter the agreements (including a money‑back promise if conversion did not occur within two years); the written agreements were procured by the same fraudulent misrepresentations and therefore rescindable; no trust was found over the purchase monies; accordingly the 1st and 2nd defendants were ordered to refund the purchase monies and the 3rd defendant was ordered to pay damages and the commission amount, with interest reserved and…