LEAN TYE HIN v. MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD AND OTHERS

LEAN TYE HIN v. MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD AND OTHERS

Judge rejected the plaintiff's account, accepted the Bank's contemporaneous records (including signed June 1990 Confirmations and the July 1990 telex), preferred the handwriting expert for the Bank and the Bank officer's evidence, and found both that the January 1990 releases were authorised by the plaintiff and that the sister gave oral authority; accordingly the Bank lawfully released the shares and the plaintiff's claim failed.

Citation
LEAN TYE HIN v. MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Lean Tye Hin; 1st Defendant: Malayan Banking Berhad; 2nd Defendant: Mayban Nominees (Hong Kong) Limited; 1st Third Party: Lean Siok Keng; 2nd Third Party: Law Man Wai
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 December 1997
Case Number
HCA6101/1991
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Banking and Custody of Securities Dispute / Trial Judgment (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Action dismissed; third party claim did not arise
Legal Topics
Custody of Securities, Authority to Withdraw, Signature Authenticity, Oral Agency, Breach of Mandate, Costs
Source Language
EN
Banking Law Equity Contract Property Law Evidence Custody of Securities Authority to Withdraw Signature Authenticity +3 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lean Tye Hin

Plaintiff

Malayan Banking Berhad

1st Defendant

Mayban Nominees (Hong Kong) Limited

2nd Defendant

Lean Siok Keng

1st Third Party

Law Man Wai

2nd Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Banking and Custody of Securities Dispute / Trial Judgment (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff gave a written instruction in July 1989 restricting release of his shares to his sister in person only
  2. 2 Whether the January 1990 releases of shares were authorised by the plaintiff and whether the six Withdrawal Forms were signed by him
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's sister orally authorised the Bank in January 1990 to release the shares to Law Man Wai

Ratio Decidendi

Judge rejected the plaintiff's account, accepted the Bank's contemporaneous records (including signed June 1990 Confirmations and the July 1990 telex), preferred the handwriting expert for the Bank and the Bank officer's evidence, and found both that the January 1990 releases were authorised by the plaintiff and that the sister gave oral authority; accordingly the Bank lawfully released the shares and the plaintiff's claim failed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; third party claim did not arise

Orders

  • Plaintiff's action dismissed against the Defendants
  • Plaintiff to pay the costs of the Defendants in the Action