HONG KONG KAM LAN KOON LTD v. REALRAY INVESTMENT LTD

HONG KONG KAM LAN KOON LTD v. REALRAY INVESTMENT LTD

Sections of the Limitation Ordinance (including ss.7 and 17) are not inconsistent with the Basic Law; the Plaintiff failed to prove adverse possession of the contested areas save for a small storage annex and the court found that the Koon enjoyed proprietary/easement/licence rights in respect of the footpath and related access (by implied licence, easement and proprietary estoppel) such that time did not run against the paper title owner during CKW's ownership; accordingly most of the Plaintiff's adverse possession claims were dismissed and the Defendant entitled to possession of the Red Land, Inner Garden and Outer Garden areas (and most of the Amenity Area) while the Koon retains...

Citation
HONG KONG KAM LAN KOON LTD v. REALRAY INVESTMENT LTD
Parties
Plaintiff / Counterclaim Defendant: Hong Kong Kam Lan Koon Limited; Defendant / Counterclaim Plaintiff: Realray Investment Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 October 2007
Case Number
HCA15824/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Land and Property (adverse Possession and Proprietary/equitable Claims) / Judgment at Trial
Outcome
Mixed judgment. Limitation Ordinance held not invalid under the Basic Law. Plaintiff's claim to an indefeasible adverse possessory title failed in respect of most disputed areas. Court recognises Koon's proprietary/easement/licence rights in respect of the Footpath (limited to ingress and egress) and finds a...
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation Ordinance, Easement (implied/grant by Necessity), Proprietary Estoppel, Licence (express and Implied), Animus Possidendi, Basic Law (property Protection)
Source Language
EN
Property Land Law Equity Constitutional Law Adverse Possession Limitation Ordinance Easement (implied/grant by Necessity) Proprietary Estoppel +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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hong Kong Kam Lan Koon Limited

Plaintiff / Counterclaim Defendant

Realray Investment Limited

Defendant / Counterclaim Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Land and Property (adverse Possession and Proprietary/equitable Claims) / Judgment at Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Limitation Ordinance provisions extinguishing paper title are inconsistent with the Basic Law
  2. 2 What acts constitute factual possession and the requisite animus possidendi for adverse possession
  3. 3 Whether the Footpath Agreement/licence survived the assignment to CKW or was impliedly continued

Ratio Decidendi

Sections of the Limitation Ordinance (including ss.7 and 17) are not inconsistent with the Basic Law; the Plaintiff failed to prove adverse possession of the contested areas save for a small storage annex and the court found that the Koon enjoyed proprietary/easement/licence rights in respect of the footpath and related access (by implied licence, easement and proprietary estoppel) such that time did not run against the paper title owner during CKW's ownership; accordingly most of the Plaintiff's adverse possession claims were dismissed and the Defendant entitled to possession of the Red Land, Inner Garden and Outer Garden areas (and most of the Amenity Area) while the Koon retains...

Court Disposition

Mixed judgment. Limitation Ordinance held not invalid under the Basic Law. Plaintiff's claim to an indefeasible adverse possessory title failed in respect of most disputed areas. Court recognises Koon's proprietary/easement/licence rights in respect of the Footpath (limited to ingress and egress) and finds a...

Orders

  • Declaration that Sections 7 and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance do not contravene Articles 6 or 105 of the Basic Law
  • Declaration that the Plaintiff is not entitled to an indefeasible adverse possessory title over the Footpath, Red Land, Inner Garden Area and Outer Garden Area except as set out below