|
CACV 439/2022,
[2024] HKCA 889
On Appeal From
[2022] HKDC 240
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF APPEAL
CIVIL APPEAL NO 439 OF 2022
(ON APPEAL FROM DCMP NO 1428 OF 2016)
_______________
|
|
IN THE MATTER OF Order 83A and Order 88 of the Rules of the District Court
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
IN THE MATTER OF the property known as ALL THOSE 4 equal undivided 428
th
parts or shares of and in ALL THOSE pieces or parcels of ground registered in the Land Registry as THE REMAINING PORTION OF NEW KOWLOON INLAND LOT NO.1121, THE REMAINING PORTION OF SECTION E OF NEW KOWLOON INLAND LOT NO.1121, THE REMAINING PORTION OF SECTION F OF NEW KOWLOON INLAND LOT NO.1121 and THE REMAINING PORTION OF SECTION G OF NEW KOWLOON INLAND LOT NO. 1121 And of and in the messuages erections and buildings erected thereon now known as PO WAH COURT (寶華閣), 432-438 Un Chau Street, Kowloon, Hong Kong (the “Building”) TOGETHER with the sole and exclusive right and privilege to hold use occupy and enjoy ALL THAT FLAT “B” on the 2ND FLOOR of the Building (the “Property”)
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
IN THE MATTER of the Second Mortgage dated 16 November 2015 registered in the Land Registry with Memorial No. 15121100450285
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
IN THE MATTER of the Loan Agreement dated 16 November 2015
|
_______________
BETWEEN
|
|
SHUN ON FINANCE LIMITED
|
Plaintiff
|
|
and
|
|
|
WONG FUNG KWAN
|
1st Defendant
|
|
|
WONG KIN HING
|
2nd Defendant
|
_______________
|
Before:
|
Hon Chu VP, Au and Chow JJA in Court
|
|
Date of Hearing:
|
13 June 2023
|
|
Date of Reasons for Judgment:
|
27 September 2024
|
______________________________________
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
______________________________________
Hon Au JA (giving the Reasons for Judgment of the Court):
A. INTRODUCTION
1.
This is the plaintiff’s appeal against the Amended Judgment (“
the Amended Judgment
”) of His Honour Judge Harold Leong (“
the Judge
”) dated 25 March 2022, by which the Judge, among others, dismissed the plaintiff’s claim against the 2
nd
defendant and allowed the 2
nd
defendant’s counterclaim. The Judge has set out his reasons for the Amended Judgment in his written judgment of the same date (“
the Written Judgment
”)
[1]
. Leave to appeal against the Amended Judgment in relation to the 2
nd
defendant was granted by the Judge
[2]
.
2.
At the end of the hearing of the appeal, we dismissed it with costs to the 2
nd
defendant. We indicated that we would hand down our reasons in due course. This is what we do now.
B. BACKGROUND
3.
The background leading to this action has been set out in some details in the Written Judgment, which we gratefully adopt. For the purpose of this appeal (which involves a narrow issue as explained below), we only need to highlight the following
[3]
.
4.
The plaintiff is a money lende
| 
Back
