Li Oi Wah v. Lau Hoi Hing
|
DCCJ 4031/2008 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CIVIL ACTION NO. 4031 OF 2008 -------------------- BETWEEN
-------------------- Coram : His Honour Judge Chow Date of hearing : 9 July, 2009 Date of handing down Decision : 27 July, 2009 DECISION 1.This is the Defendant’s appeal against the decision of Master R. Lai made on 3 March, 2009. 2.The Plaintiff’s case is that in 1995 she lent $700,000 to the defendant with interest at 2% per month. By February 2007 he repaid $700,000 to her, but he failed to pay interest on the loan, which had accumulated up to $392,900. In March 2007 she agreed to accept $150,000 for the interest. However the defendant only paid $75,000 to her. By this action she claims for the outstanding sum of $75,000. 3.The Defendant does not dispute that he paid a total sum of $700,000 to her. His case is that the sum of $700,000 was paid to her for and on behalf of a Mr. Wang Kah Sze (“Mr. Wang”). He also paid the sum of $75,000 to Mr. Wang at Mr. Wang’s request. In short, he never owed the Plaintiff any money. 4.On 6 March 2007, the Plaintiff wrote to the Defendant the following letter:-
5.According to the defendant’s affirmation, after receipt of this letter, he met Mr. Wang on 10 March 2007. He said he only agreed to assist Mr. Wang to repay the said sum of $700,000. Mr. Wang should directly deal with the Plaintiff about the matter relating to the interest. However, Mr. Wang once again requested him to assist him to repay money to the Plaintiff. At first he refused. Subsequently Mr. Wang said he could discuss with the Plaintiff to reduce the amount. He did not agree to assist Mr. Wang; he only agreed to consider assisting him. Subsequently on 14 March 2007, Mr. Wang wrote him a letter informing him that he had negotiated with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff had agreed to accept $150,000 being the full and final settlement of the interest that Mr. Wang owed her. Then he met Mr. Wang. As a good and long time friend of Mr. Wang, he only agreed to assist him to pay half of the interest and would pay him $75,000 by 12 instalments. He further agreed that if his financial position became better after paying him $75,000, he would give him a further sum of $35,000 as gift. 6.In this letter (dated 6 March, 2007), the Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant borrowed $700,000 from her through Mr. Wang, that he had to pay her a monthly interest of $14,000 and that he had not paid the interest in the total sum of $98,000, for the period from October 2002 to April, 2003. The Defendant did not contact the Plaintiff directly, and say that the allegations were simply untrue, but merely talked to Mr. Wang about this matter. This is simply incredible. 7.On 16 April 2008, the Defendant received the following note from Mr. Wang:-
In this letter the Defendant said that the balance would be repaid and that she did not have to worry. This indicates clearly that there was remaining money he had to repay to the Plaintiff. The documents unfolded in this case clearly showed that he was the borrower of money from the Plaintiff, and not Mr. Wang. He was not repaying money for Mr. Wang. He was repaying the money for himself. The decision of the learned Master R. Lai is clearly correct. Accordingly, I dismiss the Defendant’s appeal. Costs 8.I make an order nisi for costs, to be made absolute in 14 days’ time, that the Defendants is to pay the Plaintiff the costs of this application, to be taxed, if not agreed. No Certificate for Counsel.
The Plaintiff : represented by Mr. Jason Wong, instructed by M/S. Au, Thong & Tsang, Solicitors. The Defendant : represented by Mr. Simon Chu, instructed by M/S. Dissanayake & Associates, Solicitors. |