CHEUNG CHUI KWAN EVENT v. HEBEI INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

CHEUNG CHUI KWAN EVENT v. HEBEI INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

The application for permission to appeal is dismissed because Madam Cheung was not a party to the original proceedings and forcing her to join would likely defeat her adverse possession claim by operation of the relation-back principle; the Deputy High Court Judge did not err in distinguishing Chan Kwok Chu v Gotland Enterprises Ltd, and the intended appeal is not reasonably arguable.

Citation
CHEUNG CHUI KWAN EVENT v. HEBEI INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff (hcmp 1084/2008): YU FUNG COMPANY LIMITED; 1st Defendant (hcmp 1084/2008): OLYMPIC CITY PROPERTIES LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (hcmp 1084/2008): LAI MING TAK TOMMY ALEXANDER; Interested Party (hcmp 1084/2008): EVENT CHEUNG CHUI KWAN; Plaintiff (hca 3104/2015): CHEUNG CHUI KWAN EVENT; 1st Defendant (hca 3104/2015): HEBEI INVESTMENT LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (hca 3104/2015): YU FUNG COMPANY LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 June 2017
Case Number
HCA3104/2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal in Land/property (adverse Possession) Proceedings / Permission to Appeal Application — Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Relation Back Principle, Joinder, Permission to Appeal
Source Language
EN
Property Law Civil Procedure Appeal Adverse Possession Relation Back Principle Joinder Permission to Appeal

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YU FUNG COMPANY LIMITED

Plaintiff (hcmp 1084/2008)

OLYMPIC CITY PROPERTIES LIMITED

1st Defendant (hcmp 1084/2008)

LAI MING TAK TOMMY ALEXANDER

2nd Defendant (hcmp 1084/2008)

EVENT CHEUNG CHUI KWAN

Interested Party (hcmp 1084/2008)

CHEUNG CHUI KWAN EVENT

Plaintiff (hca 3104/2015)

HEBEI INVESTMENT LIMITED

1st Defendant (hca 3104/2015)

YU FUNG COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Defendant (hca 3104/2015)

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal in Land/property (adverse Possession) Proceedings / Permission to Appeal Application — Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Madam Cheung must ventilate her adverse possession claim in the original proceedings rather than commencing fresh proceedings
  2. 2 Whether forcing joinder of a non-party would defeat an adverse possession claim by application of the relation-back principle
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal is reasonably arguable

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal is dismissed because Madam Cheung was not a party to the original proceedings and forcing her to join would likely defeat her adverse possession claim by operation of the relation-back principle; the Deputy High Court Judge did not err in distinguishing Chan Kwok Chu v Gotland Enterprises Ltd, and the intended appeal is not reasonably arguable.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Costs awarded to Madam Cheung