Empirical insights on evidential presumptions: the impact of <i>Pang Siu Hing v Tsang Kwok Man</i> in Hong Kong

Abstract This article assesses the advantages and drawbacks of using evidential presumptions to determine undue influence. These presumptions serve to protect vulnerable parties by shifting the burden of proof to more powerful entities, such as banks. Cases like Etridge and O’Brien highlight their protective role. The article presents empirical evidence showing that these presumptions have positively impacted mortgage activities and banking performance, reinforcing their practical and legal value. However, as Lord Scott notes in Li Sau Ying, over-reliance on such presumptions can obscure meticulous factual analysis. The article advocates for their balanced use, especially in financial hubs like Hong Kong, to ensure professional diligence, safeguard vulnerable parties, and maintain justice and contractual freedom.