Tsui Sheung-tsing v Tsui Chi-hop

CourtDistrict Court (Hong Kong)
Judgment Date10 January 1969
Judgement NumberDCCJ9930/1968
Subject MatterCivil Action





Action No. 9930 of 1968


TSUI Sheung-tsing Plaintiff


TSUI Chi-hop
(trading as Oriental Silk Weaving Factory)


Coram: Judge Cons, in Court.

Date of Judgment: 10 January 1969




1. This is an Action by a father against his son. Apparently some considerable time ago the family divided into two camps, with the father in one and the eldest son (i.e. the defendant) in the other together with his mother and the remaining children. A state of hostilities now exists between the two camps, with writs and summonses the weapons of war. But it has not always been so. Until at least two years ago there was peaceful co-existence and trading between them, which was presumably to the benefit of both. It is upon those trading relations that this case is based.

2. The father was at that time a shopkeeper in West Germany selling, I assume amongst other items, goods purchased from and through his son in Hong Kong. His son was, and still is, in the silk-weaving business in Tsuen Wan. Payment for the goods was made by Sterling remittances from West Germany.

3. The father was trading there from 1959 to the end of 1966. He has produced evidence that during that period he made remittances on ten occasions, all between October 1962 and October 1964. He also mentioned one remittance in U.S. dollars, but no claim is made in respect of that and I do not think it is material to this action. Claim is made, however, in respect of the last six remittances; that each and every one of those was not sent in payment of goods ordered by the father, but as a personal loan to his son for the development of the silk factory. That this cannot be so in relation to each and every one of those remittances is palpably obvious. A letter written by the father on the 30th January, 1964, includes the words "I now remit to you through the Bank of Communications £50 out of which $200 will go to your brother for purchase of clothing for the New Year. The rest to be used for purchase of silk knitted-wear and sent to me." The £50 referred to was acknowledged from Hong Kong as the 3rd February that year and is one of the sums now claimed in the writ.

4. It...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT