KWOK MEI HA MAY v. CHIU YUNG

KWOK MEI HA MAY v. CHIU YUNG

Plaintiff's applications were dismissed because the defendant has arguable equitable defences: there is an arguable constructive trust in favour of Mr Tang and a factual dispute whether his equitable interest was gifted to the defendant and whether the plaintiff had notice; these are triable issues making strike out and summary judgment inappropriate, and Order 14A is unsuitable because questions posed were hypothetical.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 462
Parties
Plaintiff (registered Owner): Plaintiff; Defendant (occupier; Self Represented): Defendant; Deceased Alleged Equitable Owner: Mr Tang Chik-kit; Former Registered Owner/vendor: Mr Ho Kwok-lun
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 February 2018
Case Number
HCA3079/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil (property Dispute; Equitable Interests) / Interim Applications (strike Out, Summary Judgment, Order 14 A)
Outcome
Plaintiff's applications dismissed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Constructive Trust, Equitable Interest, Notice, Purchaser Without Notice, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Order 14 a
Source Language
EN
Property Equity Trusts Conveyancing Constructive Trust Equitable Interest Notice Purchaser Without Notice +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff (registered Owner)

Defendant

Defendant (occupier; Self Represented)

Mr Tang Chik-kit

Deceased Alleged Equitable Owner

Mr Ho Kwok-lun

Former Registered Owner/vendor

Procedural Posture

Civil (property Dispute; Equitable Interests) / Interim Applications (strike Out, Summary Judgment, Order 14 A)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Tang obtained a beneficial interest in the property by way of constructive trust
  2. 2 Whether Mr Tang gifted any equitable interest to the defendant
  3. 3 Whether any equitable interest of the defendant binds the plaintiff purchaser

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff's applications were dismissed because the defendant has arguable equitable defences: there is an arguable constructive trust in favour of Mr Tang and a factual dispute whether his equitable interest was gifted to the defendant and whether the plaintiff had notice; these are triable issues making strike out and summary judgment inappropriate, and Order 14A is unsuitable because questions posed were hypothetical.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's applications dismissed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's application to strike out the defence and counterclaim dismissed
  • Plaintiff's application for summary judgment dismissed