RE JOHN TUNG CHI YING

RE JOHN TUNG CHI YING

The court found on the facts that the caveat entered by the grand-nephew was an abuse of the caveat procedure, not shown to be for any legitimate purpose under the Probate and Administration Ordinance or rules, and accordingly exercised inherent jurisdiction to strike out the caveat; the grand-nephew's summons and interim injunction were dismissed for lack of merit and evidential support; the Probate Master's application to call in the provisional grant was denied; costs awarded to the executrix on the common fund basis (subject to submissions).

Citation
RE JOHN TUNG CHI YING
Parties
Deceased: John Tung; Executrix/beneficiary: Widow (named executrix and sole beneficiary); Caveator/claimant: Grand-nephew (Caveator, alleged creditor)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 July 1987
Case Number
HCAP2594/1987
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration / Judgment (in Chambers)
Outcome
Caveat struck out; grand-nephew's summons dismissed; application to adjourn refused; interim injunction refused; Probate Master's application denied; executrix's summons lapsed.
Legal Topics
Caveat, Provisional Grant of Probate, Revocation of Grant, Abuse of Process, Inherent Jurisdiction, Interim Injunction, Costs on Common Fund Basis
Source Language
EN
Probate Civil Procedure Trusts and Estates Equity Costs Injunctions Caveat Provisional Grant of Probate +5 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Tung

Deceased

Widow (named executrix and sole beneficiary)

Executrix/beneficiary

Grand-nephew (Caveator, alleged creditor)

Caveator/claimant

Procedural Posture

Probate and Administration / Judgment (in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an alleged creditor is entitled to enter a caveat in probate proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the caveat entered by the grand-nephew constituted an abuse of the caveat procedure
  3. 3 Whether the provisional grant of probate should be revoked or called in

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the facts that the caveat entered by the grand-nephew was an abuse of the caveat procedure, not shown to be for any legitimate purpose under the Probate and Administration Ordinance or rules, and accordingly exercised inherent jurisdiction to strike out the caveat; the grand-nephew's summons and interim injunction were dismissed for lack of merit and evidential support; the Probate Master's application to call in the provisional grant was denied; costs awarded to the executrix on the common fund basis (subject to submissions).

Court Disposition

Caveat struck out; grand-nephew's summons dismissed; application to adjourn refused; interim injunction refused; Probate Master's application denied; executrix's summons lapsed.

Orders

  • Strike out the caveat entered by the grand-nephew
  • Dismiss the grand-nephew's summons with costs to the executrix