CHAN CHUN HA v. LAM MO TSE and Another

CHAN CHUN HA v. LAM MO TSE and Another

The judge dismissed the Plaintiff's appeal on the trust/declaration claim because there was a direct conflict of evidence as to the parties' intentions which raised a triable issue requiring oral evidence; the judge allowed the Defendants' appeal concerning the HK$500,000 loan, holding that the repayment terms were sufficiently arguable (repayable from restaurant profits within up to three years and possibly impliedly repayable after three years to give business efficacy) and therefore the matter must go to trial.

Citation
CHAN CHUN HA v. LAM MO TSE and Another
Parties
Plaintiff: Chan Chun Ha; 1st Defendant: Lam Mo Tse; 2nd Defendant: Lam Sau Man
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 December 1993
Case Number
HCA5087/1993
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim (trust and Loans) / Rehearing on Appeal From Master's Order; Remitted for Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's appeal dismissed as to the trust claim; Defendants' appeal allowed as to the HK$500,000 loan; all three claims remitted for trial; directions by Master to apply equally and time to run from judgment
Legal Topics
Declaration of Trust, Summary Judgment (order 14), Appeal From Master (order 58), Repayment Terms of Loan, Implied Terms/business Efficacy, Promissory Estoppel, Costs
Source Language
EN
Trusts Property Contract Equity Civil Procedure Declaration of Trust Summary Judgment (order 14) Appeal From Master (order 58) +4 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chan Chun Ha

Plaintiff

Lam Mo Tse

1st Defendant

Lam Sau Man

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim (trust and Loans) / Rehearing on Appeal From Master's Order; Remitted for Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registered owners held the Caine Road flat on trust for the Plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the HK$600,000 paid to the 1st Defendant was a loan or a gift
  3. 3 Whether the HK$500,000 paid to the Defendants was repayable immediately or only from restaurant profits within three years

Ratio Decidendi

The judge dismissed the Plaintiff's appeal on the trust/declaration claim because there was a direct conflict of evidence as to the parties' intentions which raised a triable issue requiring oral evidence; the judge allowed the Defendants' appeal concerning the HK$500,000 loan, holding that the repayment terms were sufficiently arguable (repayable from restaurant profits within up to three years and possibly impliedly repayable after three years to give business efficacy) and therefore the matter must go to trial.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's appeal dismissed as to the trust claim; Defendants' appeal allowed as to the HK$500,000 loan; all three claims remitted for trial; directions by Master to apply equally and time to run from judgment

Orders

  • Plaintiff's appeal dismissed in relation to declaration of trust and consequential assignment
  • Defendants' appeal allowed in relation to HK$500,000 loan and matter remitted for trial on all claims