LEUNG KAI CHUNG AND OTHERS v. TSE FO SHAU

LEUNG KAI CHUNG AND OTHERS v. TSE FO SHAU

Because the plaintiffs proved continuous undisturbed possession for more than 20 years, the mortgages were only noted in the Block Crown Lease schedule with no identifiable mortgagee, and proper advertisement and substituted service had been effected, section 19 of the Limitation Ordinance extinguished the mortgages or rendered them incapable of taking effect; accordingly declarations were granted following the precedent of Fung Kam Cheung.

Citation
LEUNG KAI CHUNG AND OTHERS v. TSE FO SHAU
Parties
Plaintiff (hcmp 4206; HCMP 4207): Leung Kai Chung; Plaintiff (hcmp 4207): Leung Chu Fan; Plaintiff (hcmp 4207): Leung Sai Ping; Defendant (hcmp 4206): Tang Tsik Fuk; Defendant (hcmp 4207): Tse Fo Shau
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 September 2000
Case Number
HCMP4207/1998
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (hcmp 4206/1998; HCMP 4207/1998) / Judgment Delivered 5 September 2000
Outcome
Declarations granted in both MP 4206/1998 and MP 4207/1998 that the mortgages registered in the Schedule to the Block Crown Lease are no longer subsisting and are no longer capable of taking effect by virtue of section 19 of the Limitation Ordinance.
Legal Topics
Mortgages, Declarations, Limitation by Prescription, Substituted Service, Order 88 RHC
Source Language
EN
Property Law Limitation Law Civil Procedure Land Registration Mortgages Declarations Limitation by Prescription Substituted Service +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leung Kai Chung

Plaintiff (hcmp 4206; HCMP 4207)

Leung Chu Fan

Plaintiff (hcmp 4207)

Leung Sai Ping

Plaintiff (hcmp 4207)

Tang Tsik Fuk

Defendant (hcmp 4206)

Tse Fo Shau

Defendant (hcmp 4207)

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings (hcmp 4206/1998; HCMP 4207/1998) / Judgment Delivered 5 September 2000

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether mortgages registered in the Schedule to the Block Crown Lease are still subsisting and capable of taking effect
  2. 2 Whether section 19 of the Limitation Ordinance (Cap.347) extinguishes the mortgages given the plaintiffs' possession history
  3. 3 Whether service and substituted service requirements were complied with

Ratio Decidendi

Because the plaintiffs proved continuous undisturbed possession for more than 20 years, the mortgages were only noted in the Block Crown Lease schedule with no identifiable mortgagee, and proper advertisement and substituted service had been effected, section 19 of the Limitation Ordinance extinguished the mortgages or rendered them incapable of taking effect; accordingly declarations were granted following the precedent of Fung Kam Cheung.

Court Disposition

Declarations granted in both MP 4206/1998 and MP 4207/1998 that the mortgages registered in the Schedule to the Block Crown Lease are no longer subsisting and are no longer capable of taking effect by virtue of section 19 of the Limitation Ordinance.

Orders

  • Declaration in MP 4206/1998 that the mortgage is no longer subsisting and is no longer capable of taking effect by virtue of section 19 Limitation Ordinance.
  • Declaration in MP 4207/1998 that the mortgage is no longer subsisting and is no longer capable of taking effect by virtue of section 19 Limitation Ordinance.