CHENG OI HAN v. NG PAN KIN AND ANOTHER

CHENG OI HAN v. NG PAN KIN AND ANOTHER

On the accepted evidence plaintiff and predecessors were in continuous and exclusive possession of the Subject Lands for not less than 20 years and intended to possess them to the exclusion of the world; therefore the paper title of the defendants was extinguished and barred by sections 7 and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance and declarations should be granted in favour of the plaintiff.

Citation
[2022] HKDC 36
Parties
Plaintiff: CHENG OI HAN; 1st Defendant: NG PAN KIN; 2nd Defendant: WONG WUN CHOW
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 January 2022
Case Number
DCMP3364/2020
Procedural Posture
Adverse Possession (originating Summons) / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff; declarations granted that plaintiff acquired possessory title to the Subject Lands and that the defendants' titles were extinguished and barred under sections 7 and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Possessory Title, Limitation Ordinance Sections 7 and 17, Substituted Service
Source Language
EN
Property Law Limitation Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Possessory Title Limitation Ordinance Sections 7 and 17 Substituted Service

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 5 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHENG OI HAN

Plaintiff

NG PAN KIN

1st Defendant

WONG WUN CHOW

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Adverse Possession (originating Summons) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff acquired possessory title to the Subject Lands by adverse possession for the requisite limitation period
  2. 2 Whether the title of the 1st and 2nd defendants was extinguished and barred by sections 7 and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance
  3. 3 Whether service by substituted service was properly effected

Ratio Decidendi

On the accepted evidence plaintiff and predecessors were in continuous and exclusive possession of the Subject Lands for not less than 20 years and intended to possess them to the exclusion of the world; therefore the paper title of the defendants was extinguished and barred by sections 7 and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance and declarations should be granted in favour of the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff; declarations granted that plaintiff acquired possessory title to the Subject Lands and that the defendants' titles were extinguished and barred under sections 7 and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance.

Orders

  • Declaration that the plaintiff has been in adverse possession of the Subject Lands for a continuous period in excess of 20 years and has acquired possessory title to the Subject Lands
  • Declaration that the title of the 1st defendant, his successors in title and persons deriving title from him in relation to the Subject Lands had been extinguished and any claim barred by sections 7 and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance prior to commencement of proceedings