LAM HONG CHING ANDY v. WONG KAM TONG

LAM HONG CHING ANDY v. WONG KAM TONG

Given the Recorder's finding that the defendant acted in breach of trust by mortgaging the trust property and the defendant's failure to comply with the order to transfer title, the court was justified in making a vesting order under s45(f) Trustee Ordinance and ordering an interim payment of HK$543,604.06 to reimburse the plaintiff's payments to redeem the mortgage and discharge outstanding charges.

Citation
LAM HONG CHING ANDY v. WONG KAM TONG
Parties
Plaintiff (hca 1144/2006); 1st Defendant (hca 2320/2007): Lam Hong Ching Andy (executor of the Estate of Sung Man Po); Defendant (hca 1144/2006); Plaintiff (hca 2320/2007): Wong Kam Tong; 2nd Defendant (hca 2320/2007): Lam Tak Shing
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 February 2011
Case Number
HCA1144/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Enforcement/execution of Judgment / Application in Aid of Execution (in Chambers)
Outcome
Application granted: vesting order made; interim payment ordered; costs awarded to plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Vesting Order, Interim Payment of Damages, Mortgage, Trustee Ordinance
Source Language
EN
Equity Trusts Property Law Civil Procedure Enforcement Breach of Trust Vesting Order Interim Payment of Damages +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lam Hong Ching Andy (executor of the Estate of Sung Man Po)

Plaintiff (hca 1144/2006); 1st Defendant (hca 2320/2007)

Wong Kam Tong

Defendant (hca 1144/2006); Plaintiff (hca 2320/2007)

Lam Tak Shing

2nd Defendant (hca 2320/2007)

Procedural Posture

Civil Enforcement/execution of Judgment / Application in Aid of Execution (in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a vesting order should be made under section 45(f) of the Trustee Ordinance (Cap.29) to transfer legal title to the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the defendant acted in breach of trust by mortgaging the trust property
  3. 3 Whether an interim payment of damages should be ordered to reimburse monies expended by the plaintiff to redeem the mortgage and pay outstanding charges

Ratio Decidendi

Given the Recorder's finding that the defendant acted in breach of trust by mortgaging the trust property and the defendant's failure to comply with the order to transfer title, the court was justified in making a vesting order under s45(f) Trustee Ordinance and ordering an interim payment of HK$543,604.06 to reimburse the plaintiff's payments to redeem the mortgage and discharge outstanding charges.

Court Disposition

Application granted: vesting order made; interim payment ordered; costs awarded to plaintiff.

Orders

  • The defendant do within 14 days pay HK$543,604.06 to the plaintiff as an interim payment of damages.
  • A vesting order is made in the terms of the draft as amended during submissions (vesting legal title to the plaintiff).