WONG CHI KEUNG v. CHUI KA CHUN DICK

WONG CHI KEUNG v. CHUI KA CHUN DICK

The appeal was allowed and the summary judgment set aside because contradictory affidavits and unresolved factual disputes as to authority/title and which party repudiated the agreement created triable issues that precluded disposal by summary judgment; the matter must proceed to trial for viva voce evidence and findings of fact.

Citation
WONG CHI KEUNG v. CHUI KA CHUN DICK
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Wong Chi Keung; Defendant/appellant: Chui Ka Chun Dick
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 November 2004
Case Number
HCA28/2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Summary Judgment / Appeal Allowed and Remitted to Trial (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; summary judgment of 15 July 2004 set aside; matter remitted to trial; defendant granted unconditional leave to file Defence and Counterclaim.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Title and Authority to Sell, Forfeiture of Deposit, Repudiation and Breach of Contract, Specific Performance, Public Policy and Grant Conditions
Source Language
EN
Property Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Title and Authority to Sell Forfeiture of Deposit Repudiation and Breach of Contract Specific Performance +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wong Chi Keung

Plaintiff/respondent

Chui Ka Chun Dick

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Summary Judgment / Appeal Allowed and Remitted to Trial (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff had authority/title to sell the eight New Territories lots
  2. 2 Whether the defendant validly refused completion and was entitled to return of the HK$4,000,000 deposit
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was appropriate in the face of conflicting affidavits and absence of cross‑examination

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed and the summary judgment set aside because contradictory affidavits and unresolved factual disputes as to authority/title and which party repudiated the agreement created triable issues that precluded disposal by summary judgment; the matter must proceed to trial for viva voce evidence and findings of fact.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; summary judgment of 15 July 2004 set aside; matter remitted to trial; defendant granted unconditional leave to file Defence and Counterclaim.

Orders

  • Judgment entered against the defendant on 15 July 2004 is set aside.
  • Defendant to have unconditional leave to file and serve his Defence and Counterclaim within 14 days of date of order.