top of page
PHOTO-2024-12-05-23-09-06.jpg

Case Update - Qian Feiyi v First Prestige Inc & Ors [2024] HKCFI 3415; [2024] HKCFI 3039

Members of Pantheon Chambers acted for several the parties in a claim for US$5 million arising out of a loan agreement in a summary judgment application and subsequent appeal application. Ronald acted for the successful plaintiff at the summary judgment application and on appeal, Shaphan acted for Ms Qian in her application for an urgent Mareva injunction and Edward acted for Victoria Harbour, the 3rd defendant, at the summary judgment stage.


This case concerns a loan agreement whereby Ms Qian, i.e. the plaintiff, agreed to lend First Prestige, i.e. the 1stdefendant, a sum of USD$5 million. Originally, the loan agreement was secured by a personal guarantee from Mr. Shi, i.e. the 2nd defendant. Thereafter, First Prestige defaulted but mutually agreed extensions were entered into between the parties giving more time to First Prestige to make repayment. In exchange, the 3rd defendant, Victoria Harbourview, was added a corporate guarantee further securing the loan agreement.

Despite such extensions, First Prestige continued to default on repayment which resulted in the proceedings. Ms. Qian then applied for summary judgment. In order to protect her position in the interim, Ms Qian also obtained a Mareva injunction against Mr Shi on an urgent basis.


At the summary stage, the defendants argued that, inter alia, the loan agreement was a sham/façade which covered up a trust arrangement. None of the defendants’ grounds were accepted and summary judgment was granted in favour of Ms Qian by Master Keith Lam.


First Prestige and Mr Shi then appealed the Master’s decision. In the interim, Mr Shi attempted to obtain a stay of execution pending appeal, but this was rejected in limine by DHCJ Andrew Li on the basis that the application was an abuse of process as Mr Shi’s application, while dressed as a short 3-minute application for directions, was in substance seeking substantive relief (see [2024] HKCFI 3039).


On appeal, First Prestige and Mr Shi put forward new grounds in an attempt to show triable issues, including inter alia that the summary judgment application relied on matters outside the ambit of the pleadings. Such arguments were rejected by DHCJ R. Ismail SC and the appeal was dismissed with costs (see [2024] HKCFI 3415).


The case serves as a good reminder to practitioners that, in the context of summary judgment application, defendants should not expect the Courts to take their client’s defence at face value and instead the Court will test such defences against contemporaneous evidence and whether such defences are inherently improbable.


Full judgment is available here.


Case summary was written by Ronald. For more information about him, please visit here.


For details about Shaphan and Edward, please see here.

bottom of page