SIU SHU CHING AND OTHERS v. SIU KWOK CHEUNG AND ANOTHER

SIU SHU CHING AND OTHERS v. SIU KWOK CHEUNG AND ANOTHER

On the balance of probabilities contemporaneous documents and witness evidence established that the Plaintiffs (and their predecessors) granted an express gratuitous licence to the 1st Defendant's late father and stepmother to occupy the disputed lots; the Defendants therefore lacked the requisite animus possidendi to establish adverse possession; accordingly the Plaintiffs are entitled to vacant possession and the Defendants' counterclaims for adverse possession are dismissed.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 594
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Siu Shu Ching; 2nd Plaintiff: Siu Chun Fat; 3rd Plaintiff: Siu Hing Fong; 4th Plaintiff: Siu Shui Fat; 1st Defendant: Siu Kwok Cheung; 2nd Defendant: Leung Oi King
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 March 2022
Case Number
HCA1641/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Land Dispute (vacant Possession, Adverse Possession, Trespass) / Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiffs: Plaintiffs entitled to vacant possession of disputed lots; Defendants' counterclaims dismissed; costs ordered nisi in favour of Plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Gratuitous Licence, Animus Possidendi, Vacant Possession, Trespass, Pleadings and Amendment, Costs
Source Language
EN
Property Law Land Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Tort Adverse Possession Gratuitous Licence Animus Possidendi +4 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siu Shu Ching

1st Plaintiff

Siu Chun Fat

2nd Plaintiff

Siu Hing Fong

3rd Plaintiff

Siu Shui Fat

4th Plaintiff

Siu Kwok Cheung

1st Defendant

Leung Oi King

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Land Dispute (vacant Possession, Adverse Possession, Trespass) / Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiffs granted an express gratuitous licence to the 1st Defendant's late father and stepmother to occupy the disputed lots
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants had animus possidendi and thereby acquired title by adverse possession
  3. 3 Whether any implied licence, custom or attornment could be relied on by the Plaintiffs

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities contemporaneous documents and witness evidence established that the Plaintiffs (and their predecessors) granted an express gratuitous licence to the 1st Defendant's late father and stepmother to occupy the disputed lots; the Defendants therefore lacked the requisite animus possidendi to establish adverse possession; accordingly the Plaintiffs are entitled to vacant possession and the Defendants' counterclaims for adverse possession are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiffs: Plaintiffs entitled to vacant possession of disputed lots; Defendants' counterclaims dismissed; costs ordered nisi in favour of Plaintiffs.

Orders

  • 1st Plaintiff is entitled to vacant possession of Lot Nos.453A and 453C.
  • 2nd to 4th Plaintiffs are entitled to vacant possession of Lot No.453B and the structure erected therein and Lot No.454A.