HO SHUK MING v. AND FONG KWOK SHAN, CHRISTINE AND OTHERS

HO SHUK MING v. AND FONG KWOK SHAN, CHRISTINE AND OTHERS

The court held that the Director was not a necessary party to claims concerning the original sale and purchase agreements and vesting claims in respect of sections (other than the surrendered sections A and F), and references to the Director in those prayers should be removed; however, the claim relating to deeds of surrender, new grants, building licences and permission letters could not be struck out as a clear and obvious case and the Director should remain a party in respect of those matters so she may be heard; accordingly the pleadings were to be amended and the Director removed as a party to specified prayers and ordered to file a Defence on the remaining matters.

Citation
HO SHUK MING v. AND FONG KWOK SHAN, CHRISTINE AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Ho; Defendant: 1st Defendant; Defendant: 2nd Defendant; Defendant: 3rd Defendant; Defendant: 4th Defendant; Defendant: 5th Defendant; Defendant: 6th Defendant; Defendant: 7th Defendant; Defendant: 8th Defendant; Defendant: 9th Defendant; Defendant: 10th Defendant; Defendant: 11th Defendant; Defendant: 12th Defendant; Defendant: 13th Defendant; Defendant: 14th Defendant; Defendant: 15th Defendant; Defendant: 16th Defendant; Defendant: 17th Defendant; Defendant: 18th Defendant; Defendant: 19th Defendant; Defendant: 20th Defendant; 21st Defendant: Secretary for Justice (sued on behalf of Director of Lands)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 April 2010
Case Number
DCCJ4739/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Property / Land Dispute / Application to Strike Out and Application to Remove Party (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application partly allowed: Director removed as party to specified prayers; Director remains party in relation to deeds of surrender, new grants, building licences and permission letters; pleadings to be amended; procedural directions given.
Legal Topics
Illegal Agreements, Misrepresentation, Ting/small House Policy, Joinder of Parties, Striking Out, Void Vs Voidable Transfers, Judicial Review Vs Private Action
Source Language
EN
Property Law Administrative Law Public Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Illegal Agreements Misrepresentation Ting/small House Policy +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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ho

Plaintiff

1st Defendant

Defendant

2nd Defendant

Defendant

3rd Defendant

Defendant

4th Defendant

Defendant

5th Defendant

Defendant

6th Defendant

Defendant

7th Defendant

Defendant

8th Defendant

Defendant

9th Defendant

Defendant

10th Defendant

Defendant

11th Defendant

Defendant

12th Defendant

Defendant

13th Defendant

Defendant

14th Defendant

Defendant

15th Defendant

Defendant

16th Defendant

Defendant

17th Defendant

Defendant

18th Defendant

Defendant

19th Defendant

Defendant

20th Defendant

Defendant

Secretary for Justice (sued on behalf of Director of Lands)

21st Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Property / Land Dispute / Application to Strike Out and Application to Remove Party (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director (21st Defendant) was a necessary and proper party to the relief sought
  2. 2 Whether the parts of the claim against the Director disclosed a reasonable cause of action or were frivolous, vexatious or an abuse
  3. 3 Whether transfers/surrenders and subsequent new grants effected under an illegal scheme are void or merely voidable and recoverable by the original owner

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Director was not a necessary party to claims concerning the original sale and purchase agreements and vesting claims in respect of sections (other than the surrendered sections A and F), and references to the Director in those prayers should be removed; however, the claim relating to deeds of surrender, new grants, building licences and permission letters could not be struck out as a clear and obvious case and the Director should remain a party in respect of those matters so she may be heard; accordingly the pleadings were to be amended and the Director removed as a party to specified prayers and ordered to file a Defence on the remaining matters.

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed: Director removed as party to specified prayers; Director remains party in relation to deeds of surrender, new grants, building licences and permission letters; pleadings to be amended; procedural directions given.

Orders

  • Director removed as a party to the relief sought in the prayers summarised under paragraphs 24(1) and 24(4) of the judgment
  • Amended Writ of Summons and Re-amended Statement of Claim to be amended accordingly and filed and served within 14 days