KONG KWAI WING v. LI TAK FAN and Others

KONG KWAI WING v. LI TAK FAN and Others

The adjournment of the show-cause hearing did not discharge or cause the charging order nisi to lapse; accordingly Chow and Lee's charging order absolute (dated 1 October 1996 and effective from 6 June 1996) was valid and had priority over Kong's later charging order. There was no waiver, election or estoppel by Chow and Lee, and Master Kwan's order was set aside accordingly.

Citation
KONG KWAI WING v. LI TAK FAN and Others
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff: Kong Kwai Wing; First Defendant: Li Tak Fan; First Defendant/judgment Debtor: Ng Si Chup; Second Defendant/judgment Creditor/plaintiff: Chow Man Li; Second Defendant/judgment Creditor/plaintiff: Lee Chi Sing
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 July 1998
Case Number
HCMP3206/1997
Procedural Posture
Dispute Over Priority of Charging Orders and Sale of Jointly Owned Property / Judgment (final)
Outcome
Kong's summons to discharge Chow and Lee's priority charging order dismissed; appeal by Chow and Lee allowed
Legal Topics
Charging Order, Priority of Charges, Sale of Property, Estoppel, Procedural Adjournment
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Property Law Equity Enforcement of Judgment Charging Order Priority of Charges Sale of Property Estoppel +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 5 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kong Kwai Wing

Applicant/plaintiff

Li Tak Fan

First Defendant

Ng Si Chup

First Defendant/judgment Debtor

Chow Man Li

Second Defendant/judgment Creditor/plaintiff

Lee Chi Sing

Second Defendant/judgment Creditor/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Dispute Over Priority of Charging Orders and Sale of Jointly Owned Property / Judgment (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a charging order nisi lapses or is discharged by an adjournment sine die
  2. 2 Which charging order had priority as against proceeds of sale
  3. 3 Whether Chow and Lee were estopped or had elected to allow Kong priority

Ratio Decidendi

The adjournment of the show-cause hearing did not discharge or cause the charging order nisi to lapse; accordingly Chow and Lee's charging order absolute (dated 1 October 1996 and effective from 6 June 1996) was valid and had priority over Kong's later charging order. There was no waiver, election or estoppel by Chow and Lee, and Master Kwan's order was set aside accordingly.

Court Disposition

Kong's summons to discharge Chow and Lee's priority charging order dismissed; appeal by Chow and Lee allowed

Orders

  • Summons of Kong to discharge Chow and Lee's priority charging order dismissed with costs to Chow and Lee
  • Appeal by Chow and Lee against Master Kwan's order allowed with costs to Chow and Lee here and below, including costs of application to be joined as 2nd Defendants to Kong's action MP No. 3206 and consequent costs