WONG YUEN HEI AND ANOTHER v. WONG CHI PUN AND ANOTHER

WONG YUEN HEI AND ANOTHER v. WONG CHI PUN AND ANOTHER

The plaintiffs proved on the balance of probabilities that their father purchased the disputed property in the mid‑1940s, they have occupied it continuously since then and are his successors entitled under New Territories succession law; accordingly they are the beneficial owners of the disputed property (declaration granted); alternatively, had succession failed, their long uninterrupted possession would have given them title by adverse possession.

Citation
WONG YUEN HEI AND ANOTHER v. WONG CHI PUN AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: WONG YUEN HEI; 2nd Plaintiff: WONG YUEN CHEUNG; 1st Defendant: WONG CHI PUN; 2nd Defendant: WONG LOY HAY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 November 1997
Case Number
HCA6611/1996
Procedural Posture
Civil – Land/title Dispute (declaration of Ownership) / Judgment of the Court of First Instance (trial Concluded)
Outcome
Judgment for the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs; declaration that they are the beneficial owners of the disputed property
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title, Possessory Title, Customary Adoption, Limitation/possession (s.7), Succession Under New Territories Ordinance S.17
Source Language
EN
Property Law Succession Law Customary Law (new Territories) Adverse Possession Land Registration Declaration of Title Possessory Title Customary Adoption +2 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG YUEN HEI

1st Plaintiff

WONG YUEN CHEUNG

2nd Plaintiff

WONG CHI PUN

1st Defendant

WONG LOY HAY

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil – Land/title Dispute (declaration of Ownership) / Judgment of the Court of First Instance (trial Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are beneficial owners of the disputed property by virtue of purchase and succession
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs acquired a possessory title by adverse possession
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd defendant validly succeeded by customary adoption

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs proved on the balance of probabilities that their father purchased the disputed property in the mid‑1940s, they have occupied it continuously since then and are his successors entitled under New Territories succession law; accordingly they are the beneficial owners of the disputed property (declaration granted); alternatively, had succession failed, their long uninterrupted possession would have given them title by adverse possession.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs; declaration that they are the beneficial owners of the disputed property

Orders

  • Declaration that the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs, as successors to Wong Tak‑yip, are the beneficial owners of Lot No.248 in D.D.257 (the disputed property)
  • 2nd defendant to pay costs to the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs to be taxed by the Registrar on a party and party basis if not agreed