WU YIM KWONG KINDWIND v. MANHOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD

WU YIM KWONG KINDWIND v. MANHOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD

Plaintiff failed to prove exclusive factual possession and the requisite animus possidendi for the requisite period; aerial evidence and expert findings showed no enclosure from 1994 and significant use by third parties; plaintiffs evidence was not credible; accordingly adverse possession not established and claim dismissed.

Citation
WU YIM KWONG KINDWIND v. MANHOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD
Parties
Defendant: Manhood Development Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 December 2014
Case Number
DCCJ3839/2012
Procedural Posture
Possessory Title / Adverse Possession / Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Both the plaintiffs claim and the defendants counterclaim dismissed; plaintiff ordered to bear 80% of defendants costs (order nisi).
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Animus Possidendi, Limitation Period, Evidence and Credibility, Costs Shifting
Source Language
EN
Property Law Adverse Possession Limitation Law Civil Procedure Costs Animus Possidendi Limitation Period Evidence and Credibility +1 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manhood Development Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Possessory Title / Adverse Possession / Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff acquired possession of the disputed land since 1994
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff had the requisite intention to possess (animus possidendi)
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is entitled to wasted clearance costs of HK$35,000 on 8 August 2012

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff failed to prove exclusive factual possession and the requisite animus possidendi for the requisite period; aerial evidence and expert findings showed no enclosure from 1994 and significant use by third parties; plaintiffs evidence was not credible; accordingly adverse possession not established and claim dismissed.

Court Disposition

Both the plaintiffs claim and the defendants counterclaim dismissed; plaintiff ordered to bear 80% of defendants costs (order nisi).

Orders

  • Both claim and counterclaim dismissed
  • Order nisi that plaintiff shall bear 80% of defendants costs of this action, to be taxed if not agreed