CHIONG STANLEY v. LAM YIP HING AND ANOTHER

CHIONG STANLEY v. LAM YIP HING AND ANOTHER

The assignment was held to be duly executed because its execution clause expressly stated the signatories were directors duly authorised by the board and the statutory presumption of due execution applied; there is no requirement to show on the face of the assignment that it was signed by a specified category of director, therefore the application for leave to appeal lacked merit.

Citation
CHIONG STANLEY v. LAM YIP HING AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: CHIONG STANLEY; 1st Defendant: LAM YIP HING; 2nd Defendant: LUI KIT CHUN
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 July 2009
Case Number
DCCJ4463/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (district Court) / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal (7 July 2009)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Execution of Deeds, Authority of Directors, Presumption of Due Execution, Requisition for Proof of Execution, Costs
Source Language
EN
Conveyancing and Property Company Law Civil Procedure Execution of Deeds Authority of Directors Presumption of Due Execution Requisition for Proof of Execution Costs

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHIONG STANLEY

Plaintiff

LAM YIP HING

1st Defendant

LUI KIT CHUN

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (district Court) / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal (7 July 2009)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bushell assignment was duly executed in accordance with the required mode of execution
  2. 2 Whether the directors who signed were duly authorised by the board
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's solicitor satisfactorily answered the plaintiff's requisition

Ratio Decidendi

The assignment was held to be duly executed because its execution clause expressly stated the signatories were directors duly authorised by the board and the statutory presumption of due execution applied; there is no requirement to show on the face of the assignment that it was signed by a specified category of director, therefore the application for leave to appeal lacked merit.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs of this application to the Defendant, to be taxed if not agreed, with certificate for counsel