Li Xiao Yun and Another v. China Gas Holdings Ltd

CACV 215/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 215 OF 2013

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCL NO. 18 OF 2011)

________________________
 

D E C I S I O N

________________________
 

Hon Cheung JA (giving Decision of the Court) :

1.We refer to our decision of 17 February 2016 in which we reserved the issue of pre-judgment interest rate pending the judgments on the same topic to be delivered by two other divisions of this Court in Waddington Limited v. Chan Chun Hoo Thomas (陳俊豪)and others CACV 10/2014 and Tadjudin Sunny v Bank of America, National Association CACV 12/2015.

2.In this case the plaintiffs asked for interest at prime rate plus 1% while the defendant submitted that the rate should be HIBOR plus a percentage.  The authorities relied upon by the defendant included the two first instance decisions upon which the two other divisions of this Court had heard the appeal.

3.The two divisions of this Court have on 20 May 2016 given their judgments.  They decided that, among other things, absent evidence which shows clearly that prime rate is no longer or rarely used as a stating point, the long-established approach of using prime rate plus 1% as the starting point for awarding pre-judgment interest should continue.

4.We agree with this view.  In seeking a lower interest rate the defendant suffers from the same problem identified in these recent judgments, namely, it has adduced no evidence to justify a lower interest rate. 

5.Accordingly, prime rate plus 1% will be awarded as the basis for pre-judgment interest from 8 April 2011 (as agreed by the parties) to judgment.

Written submissions by Mr Denis Chang SC and Ms Teresa Wu, instructed by P.C. Woo & Co., for the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs

Written submissions by Mr John Hui, instructed by Baker & McKenzie, for the defendant