LAM LIN also known as LAM WUN YUN AND ANOTHER v. LAM LOK YIU AND ANOTHER

LAM LIN also known as LAM WUN YUN AND ANOTHER v. LAM LOK YIU AND ANOTHER

On the facts the court found no written declaration of trust as required by s5 CPO, no constructive or resulting trust established, credible evidence established the 1995 transfers were intended as absolute distributions to male descendants (including reasons for larger allocation to the 1st defendant), and the 2nd defendant had no notice; accordingly the plaintiffs' equitable claims failed and the claim is dismissed.

Citation
LAM LIN also known as LAM WUN YUN AND ANOTHER v. LAM LOK YIU AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Lam Lin also known as Lam Wun Yun; 2nd Plaintiff: Lam Tin Sung; 1st Defendant: Lam Lok Yiu; 2nd Defendant: Pioneer Class Industrial Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 February 2012
Case Number
HCA1895/2009
Procedural Posture
Action No 1895 of 2009 Civil Claim Concerning Land and Trusts / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Express Trust, Constructive Trust, Resulting Trust, Bona Fide Purchaser Without Notice, Fraud/mistake in Execution, Estoppel, Transfer of Land
Source Language
EN
Property Law Trusts and Equitable Remedies Conveyancing Civil Procedure Equity Express Trust Constructive Trust Resulting Trust +4 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lam Lin also known as Lam Wun Yun

1st Plaintiff

Lam Tin Sung

2nd Plaintiff

Lam Lok Yiu

1st Defendant

Pioneer Class Industrial Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Action No 1895 of 2009 Civil Claim Concerning Land and Trusts / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an express trust over the three properties was created
  2. 2 Whether transfers (deed of gift and assignments) were procured by fraud or mistake and can be set aside
  3. 3 Whether a constructive or resulting trust arose

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts the court found no written declaration of trust as required by s5 CPO, no constructive or resulting trust established, credible evidence established the 1995 transfers were intended as absolute distributions to male descendants (including reasons for larger allocation to the 1st defendant), and the 2nd defendant had no notice; accordingly the plaintiffs' equitable claims failed and the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claim dismissed

Orders

  • Costs order nisi that the plaintiffs pay the 1st and 2nd defendants' costs of the action to be taxed if not agreed