MAXCOLM FINANCE LTD v. CHAN PUI SHING PATRICK AND ANOTHER

DCMP2878/2025

[2025] HKDC 2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 2878 OF 2025

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

BACKGROUND

1.  The Plaintiff is a licensed money lender.  The 1^st Defendant and the 2^nd Defendant own a property known as Flat D on 13/F of Block D2 (Kwai Lam Court), Shatin New Town, Nos 1-15 Wang Pok Street, Shatin, New Territories (“the Property”), as tenants-in-common.

2.  On 18 October 2024, the Plaintiff and the 1^st Defendant entered into a loan agreement (“the Loan Agreement”), by which the Plaintiff agreed to lend a sum of HK$50,000.00 (“the Loan”)  to the 1^st Defendant for a term of 120 months at the interest rate of 19.80% per annum.

3.  On the same day, the Plaintiff and the 1^st Defendant executed a Mortgage (“the Mortgage”), by which the 1^st Defendant charged his interests of and in the Property to the Plaintiff to secure the repayment of his indebtedness to the extent of HK$2,500,000.00.

4.  The Plaintiff’s case is that the 1^st Defendant defaulted to make the monthly repayments due to the Plaintiff since 15 March 2025.

5.  By an Originating Summons issued on 27 May 2025, the Plaintiff claims against the 1^st Defendant for repayment of the outstanding loan and interest, and against the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants for a possession order and an order for sale of the Property.

6.  The 1^st and 2^nd Defendants have not given any notice of intention to defend, and have been absent in these proceedings.

7.  On 24 June 2025, the Plaintiff was adjudged bankrupt. 

EVIDENCE

8.  The Plaintiff has filed an Affirmation of Lee Oi Ying on 4 September 2025 (“Lee’s Affirmation”)  and the Affirmation of Hau Wing Shing Vincent on 5 November 2025 in support of its application.

9.  I am satisfied that the requirements under O 83A of the Rules of District Court have been complied with.

10.  I am also satisfied that the requirements under O 88 have been complied with.

11.  Having considered Lee’s Affirmation, I am satisfied that the 1^st Defendant has defaulted in repayment of the Loan since 15 March 2025.  Pursuant to Clause 8(a)  of the Loan Agreement, the Plaintiff is entitled to deem the outstanding balance of the Loan and interest payable to be immediately due and payable, and upon serving a written notice to demand the 1^st Defendant to repay the same within 7 days and the 1^st Defendant’s failure to do so, the Plaintiff is entitled to commence legal proceedings against the 1^st Defendant for the recovery of the entire outstanding sum.

12.  I am therefore satisfied that the Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment for the sum of HK$54,973.74 together with interest on the sum of HK$49,463.87, which is the outstanding principal, and default interest on the sum of HK$1,629.00, both at the rate of 19.80% from 4 September 2025, which is the date of Lee’s Affirmation, until payment.

13.  I am satisfied that the Plaintiff is entitled to take possession of the Property under Clause 6.01 of the Mortgage.

14.  As to the application for an order for sale under s 6 of the Partition Ordinance (Cap 352)  (“PO”), I am satisfied that the Plaintiff, being a mortgagee of the 1^st Defendant’s interests in the Property, is an “interested person” within the meaning of s 2 of the PO, and is entitled to apply for an order for sale under s 3(1)  of the PO.

15.  I am satisfied that it is just and reasonable to order the sale of the Property.  The Property is a domestic unit in a multi-storey building.  Partition of the Property is impracticable and would not be beneficial to the co-owner of the Property, ie the 2^nd Defendant.  There has not been any objections from the 1^st and/or 2^nd Defendants for the sale of the Property.  Neither of them has filed the Acknowledge of Service of the Originating Summons nor any evidence in opposition to the Plaintiff’s application herein. 

(Discussion on draft Order and costs)

DISPOSITION

16.  For the above reasons, I make an order in terms of draft Order as amended, which in my view will sufficiently safeguard the interest of the 2^nd Defendant.

17.  As to costs, I order the 1^st Defendant to pay the Plaintiff’s costs summarily assessed at HK$80,000.00.  The Plaintiff does not seek costs against the 2^nd Defendant and I make no order as to costs between the Plaintiff and the 2^nd Defendant.

18.  I thank Mr Simon Lo, solicitor for the Plaintiff, for his able assistance in this matter.