MATHAN KANER AND ANOTHER v. JOHN MICHAEL JERWOOD AND OTHERS
On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff agreed to and disposed of his beneficial interest by December 1981; part performance (including a HK$400,000 payment on account and conduct consistent with the sale) cured the lack of writing required by LARCO s6 and the transaction was not void; the sale was at arm's length and for the plaintiff's advantage and, in any event, the plaintiff was estopped from asserting any beneficial interest after December 1981.
- Citation
- MATHAN KANER AND ANOTHER v. JOHN MICHAEL JERWOOD AND OTHERS
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff: Mathan Kaner; 2nd Plaintiff: Jewelry Fashions and Pearls Inc. (trading as Jewelry Fashions Inc.); 1st Defendant: John Michael Jerwood; 2nd Defendant: White Birch Establishment; 3rd Defendant: Pearl Trade Company Limited
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 22 March 1985
- Case Number
- HCA15052/1983
- Procedural Posture
- Equity/trusts Action Concerning Disposition of Beneficial Interest in Company Shares; Breach of Trust and Accounting / High Court Judgment Delivered
- Outcome
- 2nd Plaintiff's claim dismissed; 1st Plaintiff's claim against 3rd Defendant dismissed; 1st Plaintiff's claim against 1st and 2nd Defendants succeeds in part; counterclaim for 2nd Defendant succeeded.
- Legal Topics
- Disposition of Equitable Interest, Part Performance, Statute of Frauds (formality Requirements), Trustee Purchasing Beneficiary's Interest, Account and Inquiry, Estoppel by Representation
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mathan Kaner
1st Plaintiff
Jewelry Fashions and Pearls Inc. (trading as Jewelry Fashions Inc.)
2nd Plaintiff
John Michael Jerwood
1st Defendant
White Birch Establishment
2nd Defendant
Pearl Trade Company Limited
3rd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Equity/trusts Action Concerning Disposition of Beneficial Interest in Company Shares; Breach of Trust and Accounting / High Court Judgment Delivered
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff disposed of his beneficial interest in the shares to the defendant
- 2 What were the terms of any agreement to transfer the beneficial interest
- 3 When did any transfer/assignment/disposition take place
Ratio Decidendi
On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff agreed to and disposed of his beneficial interest by December 1981; part performance (including a HK$400,000 payment on account and conduct consistent with the sale) cured the lack of writing required by LARCO s6 and the transaction was not void; the sale was at arm's length and for the plaintiff's advantage and, in any event, the plaintiff was estopped from asserting any beneficial interest after December 1981.
Court Disposition
2nd Plaintiff's claim dismissed; 1st Plaintiff's claim against 3rd Defendant dismissed; 1st Plaintiff's claim against 1st and 2nd Defendants succeeds in part; counterclaim for 2nd Defendant succeeded.
Orders
- Declaration that the 2nd Defendant became trustee of the trust shares with the 1st Defendant in favour of the 1st Plaintiff from 28 September 1976 until December 1981
- Order for inquiry as to what trust property was received or possessed by the 1st and 2nd Defendants and disposition thereof
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment