THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HANG FOOK BUILDING 對 CHONG KEE MING及另一人

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HANG FOOK BUILDING 對 CHONG KEE MING及另一人

The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed conversion of the provisional charging order to an absolute charging order because the respondent failed to discharge the burden of proof to show why the order should not be made; assertions that she must rent the property or wished to sell it did not amount to sufficient grounds to resist the order, and a request for instalments relates to the execution of the underlying award and is outside the scope of the appeal.

Citation
[2024] HKDC 626
Parties
Plaintiff (judgment Creditor): THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HANG FOOK BUILDING; First Defendant (judgment Debtor): CHONG KEE MING; Second Defendant (judgment Debtor): TSAO LUNG MAY
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 May 2024
Case Number
DCMP5782/2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal Concerning Charging Order to Enforce Award / Re‑hearing in District Court (appeal Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; provisional charging order converted to absolute charging order
Legal Topics
Charging Order, Execution of Judgment, Appeal as Re‑hearing, Costs, Enforcement of Small Claims Tribunal Award, Burden of Proof
Source Language
CH
Civil Enforcement Property Procedural Law Small Claims Charging Order Execution of Judgment Appeal as Re‑hearing +3 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HANG FOOK BUILDING

Plaintiff (judgment Creditor)

CHONG KEE MING

First Defendant (judgment Debtor)

TSAO LUNG MAY

Second Defendant (judgment Debtor)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal Concerning Charging Order to Enforce Award / Re‑hearing in District Court (appeal Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the provisional charging order should be converted to an absolute charging order over the beneficial interest in the property
  2. 2 What evidential burden lies on the judgment debtor opposing an absolute charging order
  3. 3 Whether the debtor's claim of needing to rent the property or desire to sell or to pay by instalments can defeat conversion to an absolute charging order

Ratio Decidendi

The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed conversion of the provisional charging order to an absolute charging order because the respondent failed to discharge the burden of proof to show why the order should not be made; assertions that she must rent the property or wished to sell it did not amount to sufficient grounds to resist the order, and a request for instalments relates to the execution of the underlying award and is outside the scope of the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; provisional charging order converted to absolute charging order

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Absolute charging order made over the beneficial interest in Flat A on 14th Floor, Hang Fook Building, Nos.17-23 Shanghai Street, Kowloon