Case Digest

Hong Kong judgments picked and reviewed by a practicing lawyer. Chosen for public interest, unusual facts, or an important legal principle.

• Plc v. Mkk

  District Court · 2026-07-20 · Family

  On 20 July 2026, the District Court (Thelma Kwan DJ) handed down judgment in PLC v MKK, FCMC 4209/2023, [2026] HKFC 132, dismissing the husband's addback claims and most of his alleged liabilities, and awarding the wife a 58.48% share of the matrimonial pot. Ms Sally Wong, instructed by Chaine Chow & Barbara Hung, acted for the successful wife.

• Chen Yiyi a Minor, By Her Next Friend and Father, Chen Haimeng and Others v. Secretary for Education

  Court of First Instance · 2026-07-31 · Judicial Review / Public Law

  On 31 July 2026, Coleman J in the Court of First Instance handed down judgment in HCAL 2434/2025, dismissing the substantive judicial review application brought by 87 dependant visa-holder children against the Secretary for Education. Mr Johnny Ma SC (leading Ms Rosa Lee), instructed by the Department of Justice, acted for the successful Respondent.

• 三河宏祥混凝土有限公司 v. Zhang Yongtie (張永鐵) (also known as 張永鉄)

  Court of First Instance · 2026-08-03 · Civil Procedure

  On 3 August 2026, Deputy High Court Judge Jason Pow SC handed down judgment in HCA 873/2022, 三河宏祥混凝土有限公司 v Zhang Yongtie, granting the Plaintiff common law enforcement of two PRC money judgments and entering judgment for RMB 22,855,123.54 plus interest at 15.4% p.a. Mr James Man, instructed by Anthony Siu & Co, acted for the successful Plaintiff.

• 香港特別行政區 訴 Terence Chiong Mev Leong 及另五人

  District Court · 2026-07-29 · Criminal

  On 29 July 2026, Deputy Judge Kwok Wai-kin of the District Court handed down sentence in HKSAR v Terence Chiong Mev Leong & 5 others (DCCC 1583/2025), jailing six Malaysian nationals for their part in running four "modem pool" call centres that funnelled mainland-style "fake customer service" phone scams into Hong Kong. Senior Public Prosecutor Ms Leung Po-ki prosecuted for HKSAR. All six pleaded guilty to a single count of conspiracy to defraud, contrary to common law and punishable under s.159C(6) of the Crimes Ordinance (Cap. 200), carrying a maximum of 14 years' imprisonment.

• 香港特別行政區 訴 楊思概

  Court of Final Appeal · 2016-09-23 · Criminal

  On 23 September 2016, the Court of Final Appeal handed down judgment in HKSAR v Yeung Sai Hoi (FACC 8/2015), dismissing the appellant's appeal against three convictions for dealing with property contrary to s.25(1) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance (Cap 455). Senior Counsel Li Siu Keung, with Yiu Tai Wah and Chan Hei Wa (instructed by Cheung Liu & Partners), acted for the unsuccessful appellant; Sr Assistant DPP Christine Mei Ki Yeung appeared for the respondent.

• HKSAR v. Chan Sze Chun

  Court of Appeal · 2026-07-31 · Criminal

  On 31 July 2026, the Court of Appeal (Macrae VP, Zervos and K Yeung JJA) handed down judgment in HKSAR v Chan Sze Chun (CACC 171/2023), dismissing the appellant's appeal against conviction but allowing his appeal against sentence, reducing the term from 8 years to 7½ years' imprisonment. Mr Antony Leung SPP appeared for the respondent; Mr David Boyton (instructed by Robertsons, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid) appeared for the appellant on conviction, with the appellant appearing in person on the renewed application.

• Li Chun Bon and Another v. China Mobile Hong Kong Co Ltd

  Court of Appeal · 2026-07-24 · Civil Procedure

  The plaintiffs sued China Mobile Hong Kong in DCCJ 617/2017. Before trial, the defendant made a sanctioned offer under O.22 r.23 of the Rules of the District Court (Cap. 336H) for $63,333.40, inclusive of interest, plus costs to the plaintiffs. The offer contained three non-monetary terms: (i) the plaintiffs undertaking not to commence any fresh action on the same facts (Clause 4, the "Restrictive Condition"); (ii) a mutual confidentiality clause covering negotiations and settlement terms (Clause 5, the "Confidentiality Condition"); and (iii) discontinuance at each party's own costs. The plaintiffs did not accept by the 23 August 2017 deadline. The trial judge dismissed the claim and ordered the plaintiffs to pay the defendant's costs on a party-and-party basis up to 23 August 2017, then on an indemnity basis thereafter, with enhanced interest at 4.9375% p.a. under Golden Eagle International (Group) Ltd v GR Investment Holdings Ltd [2010] 3 HKLRD 273 (§3).

• Lam Leong Fai v. Chan Tak Choi and Another

  Court of First Instance · 2026-07-27 · Commercial

  This trial concerns a partnership dispute between Mr Lam Leong Fai (90% partner) and Mr Chan Tak Choi (10% partner, sole mahjong licence holder), who have run 百樂麻雀娛樂公司 together since 2004. Mr Lam sued in 2019 alleging Mr Chan breached the partnership by removing him as management agent and appointing his son (the 2nd Defendant). Mr Lam has since abandoned most reliefs; only a damages claim remained. Mr Chan counterclaimed for dissolution and accounts. Three issues were tried: (i) the partnership's true profits from August 2013 to December 2020; (ii) whether payments to Mr Chan under four "labels" (salary, 牌租/枱租, 下欄, 特別津貼) were in fact a sham disguising his 10% profit share; and (iii) the validity of Mr Lam's damages claim.

• Yiu Ka Kui v. Tay Gak Yong and Tay Fengyi, Administrators of the Estate of Ching Mun Fong (also known as Ching Fook Fook) and Another

  Court of First Instance · 2026-07-20 · Civil Procedure

  The plaintiff, Yiu Ka Kui, is a maternal nephew of Ching Mun Fong, who died in Singapore on 11 November 2023 leaving an estate worth over SG$1.9 billion (§3, §67). The deceased had resided year-round in Singapore since 2006 and was survived only by her daughter Collin and Collin's two children, the Tay Children (§6, §19). Within four days of the death, the Tay Children applied for and obtained a grant of letters of administration in Singapore on an intestacy basis, then had it re-sealed in Hong Kong on 5 March 2025 (§4, §8).

• Cs v. Hkr

  Court of Appeal · 2026-07-20 · Arbitration

  CS was main contractor on the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge Project. HKR was the marine works subcontractor under a remeasurement contract (§6). Two disputes went to arbitration: the Sand Fill Issue (whether HKR could claim 100% sand fill, or had to use 30% public fill under a pre-contract oral agreement and Main Contract terms) and the Double Recovery Issue (whether BQ Item 19 and Extra Works Item 20 paid twice for the same rockfill). Arbitrator Mr Bernard Wu found for HKR on both. CS sought leave to appeal under s 5/6 of Schedule 2 to the Arbitration Ordinance. The judge refused leave on 22 November 2024, then granted it on 7 February 2025. CS appealed. The Court of Appeal (Poon CJHC, Kwan VP and Chow JA) dismissed the appeal on 20 July 2026.