12 Feb 2026
滙龍按揭信貸有限公司 對 馮添華
- Citation
- [2026] HKCFI 865
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA1631/2024
Extension of time was refused because the defendant's alleged new evidence would not meet the Ladd v Marshall requirement that it would have an important influence on the outcome (the stock charges produced related to different loans and the antiques/paintings allegation was a bare assertion without documentary support), and the defendant failed to demonstrate reasonable inability to present the evidence earlier; consequently there was no real prospect of success on appeal and the application was dismissed with an interim costs order against the defendant.