KWAN HUNG SHING, as executor of the estate of HO SHUK MING, deceased v. FONG KWOK SHAN, CHRISTINE AND OTHERS

KWAN HUNG SHING, as executor of the estate of HO SHUK MING, deceased v. FONG KWOK SHAN, CHRISTINE AND OTHERS

The Decision was interlocutory; the 1st defendant failed to meet the applicable threshold for an out‑of‑time application (no reasonable or real prospect of success given inexcusable delay); the release of the Director from the implied undertaking was justified on public interest grounds and because the Documents were connected to the originating cause of action; no LPP was asserted, so no shift of burden occurred.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 1112
Parties
Plaintiff (as Executor of the Estate of HO SHUK Ming, Deceased): KWAN HUNG SHING (關雄盛); 1st Defendant: FONG KWOK SHAN, CHRISTINE (方國珊); 2nd Defendant: SHEK WAI MAN (石偉文); 3rd Defendant: LI HON FUNG (李漢豐); 4th Defendant: SHEK KAM SING (石錦勝); 5th Defendant: LAU KAM YAN (劉錦仁); 6th Defendant: SHEK KAM HUNG (石錦鴻); 7th Defendant (administratrix of the Estate of LAU SHUI Sang, Deceased): LAU CHAN KOON KIU (劉陳觀嬌); 8th Defendant: SHEK HO TAI (石好娣); 9th Defendant: LAU KAM WAH (劉錦華); 10th Defendant: SHEK WAI KEUNG (石偉強); 11th Defendant: LI HON FAI (李漢輝); 12th Defendant: SHEK WAI MING (石偉明); 13th Defendant: WONG TO WING (黃道榮); 14th Defendant: SHEK KWAI SANG (石季生); 15th Defendant: GRAND RESOURCES PROPERTIES LIMITED (宏億置業有限公司); 16th Defendant: SHEK KWAI CHOI (石貴彩); 17th Defendant: SHEK YAU CHOI (石有彩); 18th Defendant: CHEUNG CHUNG YIU LING KONG (張聰耀玲光); 19th Defendant: CHEUNG WO PING (張和平); 20th Defendant: CHEUNG TUEN KET (張團結); 21st Defendant (sued on Behalf of the Director of Lands): SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (SUED ON BEHALF OF THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 April 2022
Case Number
HCA265/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time Against Interlocutory Order (release From Implied Undertaking)
Outcome
Summons of 13 April 2021 dismissed; leave to appeal out of time refused.
Legal Topics
Implied Undertaking, Leave to Appeal, Interlocutory Order, Disclosure, Legal Professional Privilege, Resulting Trust, Public Interest Disclosure
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Property Law Trusts Professional Privilege Implied Undertaking Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order +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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KWAN HUNG SHING (關雄盛)

Plaintiff (as Executor of the Estate of HO SHUK Ming, Deceased)

FONG KWOK SHAN, CHRISTINE (方國珊)

1st Defendant

SHEK WAI MAN (石偉文)

2nd Defendant

LI HON FUNG (李漢豐)

3rd Defendant

SHEK KAM SING (石錦勝)

4th Defendant

LAU KAM YAN (劉錦仁)

5th Defendant

SHEK KAM HUNG (石錦鴻)

6th Defendant

LAU CHAN KOON KIU (劉陳觀嬌)

7th Defendant (administratrix of the Estate of LAU SHUI Sang, Deceased)

SHEK HO TAI (石好娣)

8th Defendant

LAU KAM WAH (劉錦華)

9th Defendant

SHEK WAI KEUNG (石偉強)

10th Defendant

LI HON FAI (李漢輝)

11th Defendant

SHEK WAI MING (石偉明)

12th Defendant

WONG TO WING (黃道榮)

13th Defendant

SHEK KWAI SANG (石季生)

14th Defendant

GRAND RESOURCES PROPERTIES LIMITED (宏億置業有限公司)

15th Defendant

SHEK KWAI CHOI (石貴彩)

16th Defendant

SHEK YAU CHOI (石有彩)

17th Defendant

CHEUNG CHUNG YIU LING KONG (張聰耀玲光)

18th Defendant

CHEUNG WO PING (張和平)

19th Defendant

CHEUNG TUEN KET (張團結)

20th Defendant

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (SUED ON BEHALF OF THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS)

21st Defendant (sued on Behalf of the Director of Lands)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time Against Interlocutory Order (release From Implied Undertaking)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Decision releasing the Director from the implied undertaking is interlocutory or final
  2. 2 Whether the 1st defendant is entitled to leave to appeal out of time and applicable threshold
  3. 3 Whether disclosure to the Director was justified by public interest and connection to the original cause of action

Ratio Decidendi

The Decision was interlocutory; the 1st defendant failed to meet the applicable threshold for an out‑of‑time application (no reasonable or real prospect of success given inexcusable delay); the release of the Director from the implied undertaking was justified on public interest grounds and because the Documents were connected to the originating cause of action; no LPP was asserted, so no shift of burden occurred.

Court Disposition

Summons of 13 April 2021 dismissed; leave to appeal out of time refused.

Orders

  • The 1st defendant's summons dated 13 April 2021 is dismissed.
  • The costs of the application are to be paid by the 1st defendant to the 21st defendant; costs to be taxed if not agreed.