IP WAN FAT AND OTHERS v. KING UNION INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER

IP WAN FAT AND OTHERS v. KING UNION INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER

The summons under Order 14A is dismissed because the determination of the true construction of the Assignment and the correct boundary cannot properly be made without resolving conflicting expert land survey evidence and assessing the accuracy and interplay of the 1973, 1992 and 1999 plans at a full trial.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 2332
Parties
1st Plaintiff: IP WAN FAT; 2nd Plaintiff: IP WAI HONG; 3rd Plaintiff: SUNG HAU TAK; 4th Plaintiff: IP MIU HA; 5th Plaintiff: IP WAI MAN RAYMOND; 1st Defendant: KING UNION INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: HO KWOK WA
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 October 2018
Case Number
HCA240/2016
Procedural Posture
Land/boundary Dispute / Interlocutory Application Under Order 14 a (summons Hearing); Dismissed and Ordered to Proceed to Full Trial
Outcome
Summons under Order 14A dismissed; question reserved for full trial
Legal Topics
Construction of Conveyance, Setting Out Plans, Registration and Priority of Plans, Order 14 a Interlocutory Procedure, Expert Surveyor Evidence
Source Language
EN
Property Law Land Registration Civil Procedure Evidence (expert) Construction of Conveyance Setting Out Plans Registration and Priority of Plans Order 14 a Interlocutory Procedure +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IP WAN FAT

1st Plaintiff

IP WAI HONG

2nd Plaintiff

SUNG HAU TAK

3rd Plaintiff

IP MIU HA

4th Plaintiff

IP WAI MAN RAYMOND

5th Plaintiff

KING UNION INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED

1st Defendant

HO KWOK WA

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land/boundary Dispute / Interlocutory Application Under Order 14 a (summons Hearing); Dismissed and Ordered to Proceed to Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, on true construction of the Assignment dated 10 March 1992, the boundary was as marked on the 1992 Plan (J-A) where section X adjoined section W
  2. 2 Whether the question could be determined on an Order 14A summons without a full trial given conflicting expert survey evidence
  3. 3 The relevance and weight of competing plans (1973 Plan, 1992 Plan, 1999 Plan) and registration timing to title and boundary determination

Ratio Decidendi

The summons under Order 14A is dismissed because the determination of the true construction of the Assignment and the correct boundary cannot properly be made without resolving conflicting expert land survey evidence and assessing the accuracy and interplay of the 1973, 1992 and 1999 plans at a full trial.

Court Disposition

Summons under Order 14A dismissed; question reserved for full trial

Orders

  • Summons dismissed
  • Costs to follow the event