

Filipino church’s ownership of Kowloon cinema premises affirmed upon determining its valid exercise of an option to purchase
In JIL Investments Limited v Jesus Is Lord Church Limited [2026] HKCFI 1119, the Court of First Instance ruled that the Defendant, the Hong Kong branch of a global evangelical Christian church founded in the Philippines, after having paid in excess of HK$23 million by way of monthly payments over 12 years, had validly exercised an option to purchase its premises in Sham Shui Po from the Plaintiff landlord for a further HK$1. In 2003, the parties entered into a Lease and Purch
53 minutes ago


CFI enters judgment exceeding HK$234 million against a prominent businessman who denied signing personal guarantee deeds
In China Energy Development Holdings Limited v Yeung Ka Sing, Carson [2026] HKCFI 1693, the Court ruled that the Plaintiff, represented by Mr Jacky Lam, could recover amounts owed to it by personal guarantee in excess of HK$234 million. The issue was whether the Defendant, a prominent businessman, had in fact signed two personal guarantee deeds whose effect was to transfer the debt of a media company of which he was a substantial shareholder to him personally. Between 2008
4 days ago


A more streamlined approach for sentencing cases involving “cocktail” drugs
The Court of Appeal’s recent judgment in HKSAR v Yau Kai Fung [2026] HKCA 885 brings welcome clarity to how courts should sentence offenders trafficking in more than one type of dangerous drug. For over a decade, sentencing courts faced with a “cocktail” or combination of drugs were guided by HKSAR v Chan Yuk Leong (CACC 318/2013), which set out “three check tests”, namely absurdity test, conversion test and ratio test, to cross-check whether the upward adjustment to the star
Jun 2


Members of Plowman Chambers act for the Securities and Futures Commission in the insider dealing trial against movie producer Raymond Wong Pak Ming (黃栢鳴)
On 22 May 2026, well-known movie producer Mr Raymond Wong Pak Ming was convicted of insider dealing in a criminal prosecution brought by the Securities and Futures Commission. The Defendant faced one count of insider dealing, contrary to section 291(1)(b) of the Securities and Futures Ordinance, Cap. 571. He was said to have counselled or procured another person to deal in the shares of Pegasus Entertainment Holdings Limited around 25 August 2017 to 17 October 2017 while he
May 27











