TSUI YIN FONG v. EDWARD JOHNSON

TSUI YIN FONG v. EDWARD JOHNSON

The out‑of‑time appeal and application to stay execution were dismissed: the defendant provided no adequate explanation for delay, no arguable defence to defeat summary judgment beyond a narrow waiver issue already limited by the master, the counterclaim cannot support legal set‑off, and the alleged subsequent settlement was insufficiently evidenced to justify further stay of execution.

Citation
TSUI YIN FONG v. EDWARD JOHNSON
Parties
1st Plaintiff: TSUI YIN FONG (Administrator of the estate of TSUI KOON BO); 2nd Plaintiff: TSUI MING WAI; Defendant: EDWARD JOHNSON
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 September 2012
Case Number
DCCJ4726/2011
Procedural Posture
Tenancy/possession Dispute / Appeal Against Master's Summary Judgment and Application for Stay of Execution
Outcome
Summons dismissed; application for appeal out of time and stay of execution refused.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Writ of Possession, Stay of Execution, Set Off, Mesne Profits, Appeal Out of Time
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Civil Procedure Property Tort Summary Judgment Writ of Possession Stay of Execution Set Off +2 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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TSUI YIN FONG (Administrator of the estate of TSUI KOON BO)

1st Plaintiff

TSUI MING WAI

2nd Plaintiff

EDWARD JOHNSON

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Tenancy/possession Dispute / Appeal Against Master's Summary Judgment and Application for Stay of Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the out‑of‑time appeal should be entertained
  2. 2 Whether there is a bona fide defence to resist summary judgment
  3. 3 Whether alleged oral waiver of rent excused ongoing non‑payment

Ratio Decidendi

The out‑of‑time appeal and application to stay execution were dismissed: the defendant provided no adequate explanation for delay, no arguable defence to defeat summary judgment beyond a narrow waiver issue already limited by the master, the counterclaim cannot support legal set‑off, and the alleged subsequent settlement was insufficiently evidenced to justify further stay of execution.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; application for appeal out of time and stay of execution refused.

Orders

  • The defendant's summons filed 19 September 2012 is dismissed.
  • The defendant shall bear the costs occasioned by his summons.