CHEUNG FUK YU DANNY AND ANOTHER v. VU POI VAN

CHEUNG FUK YU DANNY AND ANOTHER v. VU POI VAN

Leave to appeal was refused because the defendant failed to establish an arguable case with a reasonable prospect of success: the court had properly considered the DLO and BD documents and found unresolved risk of enforcement by the BD, and the defendant could not raise unpleaded out-of-time arguments at the leave stage; accordingly payment of HK$290,000 was ordered to be paid out to the plaintiffs and costs to plaintiffs on a party-and-party basis.

Citation
CHEUNG FUK YU DANNY AND ANOTHER v. VU POI VAN
Parties
Plaintiff: 1st Plaintiff; Plaintiff: 2nd Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 June 2015
Case Number
DCCJ2817/2013
Procedural Posture
Conveyancing Dispute (sale of Property) / Application for Leave to Appeal and Payment Out Application (post Judgment)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; payment out of HK$290,000 to plaintiffs granted; costs ordered to plaintiffs (nisi).
Legal Topics
Proof of Title, Requisitions in Sale Agreements, Leave to Appeal (district Court), Payment Into Court, Certificate of Compliance, Letter of Toleration, Building Enforcement
Source Language
EN
Conveyancing Property Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review/administrative Enforcement Proof of Title Requisitions in Sale Agreements Leave to Appeal (district Court) Payment Into Court +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

1st Plaintiff

Plaintiff

2nd Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Conveyancing Dispute (sale of Property) / Application for Leave to Appeal and Payment Out Application (post Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant proved good title in light of unanswered requisitions
  2. 2 Whether a Letter of Toleration and Certificate of Compliance issued by the DLO preclude enforcement action by the Building Department
  3. 3 Whether out-of-time requisitions are waived or actionable where they go to the root of the contract/title

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the defendant failed to establish an arguable case with a reasonable prospect of success: the court had properly considered the DLO and BD documents and found unresolved risk of enforcement by the BD, and the defendant could not raise unpleaded out-of-time arguments at the leave stage; accordingly payment of HK$290,000 was ordered to be paid out to the plaintiffs and costs to plaintiffs on a party-and-party basis.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; payment out of HK$290,000 to plaintiffs granted; costs ordered to plaintiffs (nisi).

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal by the defendant be dismissed
  • HK$290,000 from the payment into court made by the defendant on 3 December 2014 be paid out to the plaintiffs in satisfaction of the Judgment