LAI KO CHOY v. LAI KIN AND ANOTHER

LAI KO CHOY v. LAI KIN AND ANOTHER

On the balance of probabilities the court found the HK$600,000 was an absolute gift to the 1st defendant, there was no 2002 oral agreement creating an express trust, and any asserted oral trust of land was unenforceable under s 5(1)(b) CPO; accordingly the defendants are legal and beneficial owners and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Citation
[2021] HKDC 378
Parties
Plaintiff: Lai Ko Choy; 1st Defendant: Lai Kin (黎健); 2nd Defendant: Kwong Lai Sim (鄺麗嬋)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 April 2021
Case Number
DCCJ1917/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (trust/property) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed. Defendants declared legal and beneficial owners of the Property. Costs order nisi in favour of defendants.
Legal Topics
Express Trust, Constructive Trust, Resulting Trust, Presumption of Advancement, S 5(1)(b) Conveyancing and Property Ordinance, Mesne Profits, Credibility Assessment, Pleading Rules
Source Language
EN
Trusts Property Law Equity Civil Procedure Evidence Express Trust Constructive Trust Resulting Trust +5 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lai Ko Choy

Plaintiff

Lai Kin (黎健)

1st Defendant

Kwong Lai Sim (鄺麗嬋)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (trust/property) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HK$600,000 was given on trust for the plaintiff under the alleged 2002 oral agreement or was an absolute gift
  2. 2 Whether an oral express trust of land was proved and enforceable despite lack of writing
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd defendant was bound by any alleged trust

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the court found the HK$600,000 was an absolute gift to the 1st defendant, there was no 2002 oral agreement creating an express trust, and any asserted oral trust of land was unenforceable under s 5(1)(b) CPO; accordingly the defendants are legal and beneficial owners and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed. Defendants declared legal and beneficial owners of the Property. Costs order nisi in favour of defendants.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim dismissed
  • No declaration of trust granted