BRIGHTLAND CORPORATION LTD v. BANHART CO LTD

BRIGHTLAND CORPORATION LTD v. BANHART CO LTD

Section 19 was interpreted to include instruments 'pending registration' and the court exercised its wide discretion to vacate the registration of the five instruments because the notes affected the whole floor while the dispute concerned only Unit C, the applicant offered security, the claimants sought damages not specific performance, and adequate security would protect their interests; the court assessed and fixed aggregate security at HK$12,000,000 (HK$6,000,000 for each claimant) as sufficient though not total compensation.

Citation
BRIGHTLAND CORPORATION LTD v. BANHART CO LTD
Parties
Plaintiff (hca 1445/2005); 1st Defendant (hca 1540/2005): Brightland Corporation Limited; Plaintiff (hca 1540/2005): Crowning Success Limited; 2nd Defendant (applicant): Banhart Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 April 2008
Case Number
HCA1445/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Property Dispute; Interlocutory Application to Vacate Land Registration Under Land Registration Ordinance / Interlocutory Application Heard 18 March 2008; Decision Delivered 10 April 2008
Outcome
Application allowed in part; registration of five instruments vacated upon payment into court of securities totaling HK$12,000,000 (HK$6,000,000 for 1st Defendant and HK$6,000,000 for Plaintiff); liberty to apply for further directions; costs in the cause; order nisi to become absolute in 14 days; decision not to be...
Legal Topics
Lis Pendens, Vacation of Registration, Security for Claimants, Mitigation of Loss, Section 19 LRO
Source Language
EN
Property Law Civil Procedure Land Registration Lis Pendens Vacation of Registration Security for Claimants Mitigation of Loss Section 19 LRO

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brightland Corporation Limited

Plaintiff (hca 1445/2005); 1st Defendant (hca 1540/2005)

Crowning Success Limited

Plaintiff (hca 1540/2005)

Banhart Company Limited

2nd Defendant (applicant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Property Dispute; Interlocutory Application to Vacate Land Registration Under Land Registration Ordinance / Interlocutory Application Heard 18 March 2008; Decision Delivered 10 April 2008

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Court has jurisdiction under s.19 LRO to vacate registrations that are 'pending registration'
  2. 2 Whether Court should exercise its discretion to vacate registration in favour of applicant
  3. 3 What quantum of security is appropriate and whether both claimants require separate security

Ratio Decidendi

Section 19 was interpreted to include instruments 'pending registration' and the court exercised its wide discretion to vacate the registration of the five instruments because the notes affected the whole floor while the dispute concerned only Unit C, the applicant offered security, the claimants sought damages not specific performance, and adequate security would protect their interests; the court assessed and fixed aggregate security at HK$12,000,000 (HK$6,000,000 for each claimant) as sufficient though not total compensation.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; registration of five instruments vacated upon payment into court of securities totaling HK$12,000,000 (HK$6,000,000 for 1st Defendant and HK$6,000,000 for Plaintiff); liberty to apply for further directions; costs in the cause; order nisi to become absolute in 14 days; decision not to be...

Orders

  • Upon payment into court of HK$6,000,000 as security for the 1st Defendant (HCA 1445/2005) and HK$6,000,000 as security for the Plaintiff (HCA 1540/2005), vacate registration of: Writ of Summons in HCA 1445/2005 by Memorial No.05072700970010
  • Vacate registration of Preliminary sale and purchase agreement by Memorial No.UB9450060