YIM TIN FOOK AND ANOTHER v. YU CHOR LAI, KONG WAI HUNG and SOU KA LUN t/a WANG CHEUNG INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO AND ANOTHER

YIM TIN FOOK AND ANOTHER v. YU CHOR LAI, KONG WAI HUNG and SOU KA LUN t/a WANG CHEUNG INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO AND ANOTHER

The statutory extension of the Block Lease effected by the NTLEO in 1988 did not change the legal or beneficial ownership of the leasehold estate in the Parent Lot (ownership remained with D2); accordingly D2's counterclaim fails as against the Registered Owners including those who did not appear; interlocutory...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2933
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action): YIM TIN FOOK; Plaintiff (original Action): YIM TIN YAU; Defendant (original Action): YU CHOR LAI; Defendant (original Action): KONG WAI HUNG; Defendant (original Action): SOU KA LUN; Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim) Personal Representative of the Estate of to CHEONG Lam, Deceased: TO SZE ON; Defendant (counterclaim): CHAN HI; Defendant (counterclaim): YEUNG HONG SANG; Defendant (counterclaim): CHAN WAI KIN; Defendant (counterclaim): PO YUEN KWAN SHIRLEY; Defendant (counterclaim): LEUNG KWAN POK KEN; Defendant (counterclaim): W.S. REALTY COMPANY LIMITED; Defendant (counterclaim): TO SHUI KI; Defendant (counterclaim): WU CHUN WAI
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 December 2019
Case Number
HCA2613/2006
Procedural Posture
Original Action and Counterclaim (civil) / Post Decision Written Submissions and Decision on Relief and Costs
Outcome
Orders made determining that the statutory lease extension did not alter ownership; D2's counterclaim dismissed as against Registered Owners; interlocutory judgment for mesne profits against D1 and D2 granted and assessment directions ordered; DC6 not granted demolition/vacant possession relief; costs awarded to...
Legal Topics
Lease Extension, Registered Owners, Mesne Profits, Demolition, Vacant Possession, Counterclaim Dismissal, Costs Allocation
Source Language
en
Property Civil Procedure Costs Land Law Lease Extension Registered Owners Mesne Profits Demolition +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YIM TIN FOOK

Plaintiff (original Action)

YIM TIN YAU

Plaintiff (original Action)

YU CHOR LAI

Defendant (original Action)

KONG WAI HUNG

Defendant (original Action)

SOU KA LUN

Defendant (original Action)

TO SZE ON

Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim) Personal Representative of the Estate of to CHEONG Lam, Deceased

CHAN HI

Defendant (counterclaim)

YEUNG HONG SANG

Defendant (counterclaim)

CHAN WAI KIN

Defendant (counterclaim)

PO YUEN KWAN SHIRLEY

Defendant (counterclaim)

LEUNG KWAN POK KEN

Defendant (counterclaim)

W.S. REALTY COMPANY LIMITED

Defendant (counterclaim)

TO SHUI KI

Defendant (counterclaim)

WU CHUN WAI

Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Original Action and Counterclaim (civil) / Post Decision Written Submissions and Decision on Relief and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statutory extension of the Block Lease effected by the NTLEO altered legal or beneficial ownership of the leasehold estate in the Parent Lot
  2. 2 Whether D2's counterclaim could succeed as against the Registered Owners including those who did not appear
  3. 3 Whether DC6 was entitled to demolition and vacant possession without having issued a counterclaim against D1 and D2

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory extension of the Block Lease effected by the NTLEO in 1988 did not change the legal or beneficial ownership of the leasehold estate in the Parent Lot (ownership remained with D2); accordingly D2's counterclaim fails as against the Registered Owners including those who did not appear; interlocutory judgment for mesne profits against D1 and D2 is granted with directions for assessment; DC6 is not entitled to demolition or delivery up of vacant possession because it did not plead and pursue such relief; costs are awarded to the Registered Owners and a certificate for two counsel is justified given the complexity of the issues.

Court Disposition

Orders made determining that the statutory lease extension did not alter ownership; D2's counterclaim dismissed as against Registered Owners; interlocutory judgment for mesne profits against D1 and D2 granted and assessment directions ordered; DC6 not granted demolition/vacant possession relief; costs awarded to...

Orders

  • The statutory extension of the term of the Block Lease effected by the NTLEO in 1988 did not alter the legal or beneficial ownership of the leasehold estate in the Parent Lot (ownership remains with D2).
  • D2's counterclaim is dismissed as against all of the Registered Owners.