YEUNG, ABRAHAM v. SUN KING KAI

YEUNG, ABRAHAM v. SUN KING KAI

The court held the contents of the three meetings were not in the nature of without prejudice settlement negotiations and therefore were not privileged; there was no plain and obvious case to strike out the pleadings on that ground; accordingly the strike out application was dismissed while permitting specified amendments and making costs orders.

Citation
YEUNG, ABRAHAM v. SUN KING KAI
Parties
Plaintiff (by Original Action): Pastor Yeung; Defendant (executrix) (by Original Action): Madam Sun
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 September 2016
Case Number
HCA413/2015
Procedural Posture
Adverse Possession and Charitable Trust Dispute (interlocutory) / Interlocutory – Strike Out Application and Amendment of Pleadings
Outcome
Application to strike out dismissed except that voluntary further and better particulars were struck out; leave granted to amend pleadings and substitute/join parties; costs awarded as specified.
Legal Topics
Charitable Trust, Adverse Possession, Strike Out Under Order 18 R19, Without Prejudice Communications, Privilege Exception, Amendment of Pleadings
Source Language
EN
Trusts Property Law Civil Procedure Evidence Costs Charitable Trust Adverse Possession Strike Out Under Order 18 R19 +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pastor Yeung

Plaintiff (by Original Action)

Madam Sun

Defendant (executrix) (by Original Action)

Procedural Posture

Adverse Possession and Charitable Trust Dispute (interlocutory) / Interlocutory – Strike Out Application and Amendment of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pleadings and affidavit evidence concerning three post‑commencement meetings were protected by without prejudice privilege and should be struck out
  2. 2 Whether the communications amounted to bona fide settlement negotiations
  3. 3 Whether the exception to without prejudice privilege (perjury or unambiguous impropriety) applied

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the contents of the three meetings were not in the nature of without prejudice settlement negotiations and therefore were not privileged; there was no plain and obvious case to strike out the pleadings on that ground; accordingly the strike out application was dismissed while permitting specified amendments and making costs orders.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out dismissed except that voluntary further and better particulars were struck out; leave granted to amend pleadings and substitute/join parties; costs awarded as specified.

Orders

  • Voluntary further and better particulars in paragraph 4 of the summons are struck out.
  • Subject to the foregoing, the application for striking out is dismissed.