LEE LAI CHING v. LEE MAN FOR AND ANOTHER

LEE LAI CHING v. LEE MAN FOR AND ANOTHER

Defendants wilfully forborne from administering the estate, their explanations for delay were unsatisfactory or unsupported, and therefore under Order 62 r.6(2) they acted unreasonably and must personally bear the costs of these proceedings (excluding costs already ordered payable personally dated 13 June 2006).

Citation
LEE LAI CHING v. LEE MAN FOR AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Ms Ching (Nancy); 1st Defendant: Dennis For (Lee Man For); 2nd Defendant: Steven Hok (Li Mun Hok Steven)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 March 2011
Case Number
HCMP1576/2003
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (probate/estate Administration) / Costs Decision / Reasons for Decision on Costs
Outcome
Defendants ordered to pay the costs of these proceedings personally, except for costs already covered by the order dated 13 June 2006.
Legal Topics
Executor Duties, Personal Liability for Costs, Wilful Forbearance, Administration of Estate Assets, Probate Abroad, Appointment of Replacement Executor
Source Language
EN
Probate Estate Administration Trusts Succession Civil Procedure Costs Executor Duties Personal Liability for Costs +4 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Ching (Nancy)

Plaintiff

Dennis For (Lee Man For)

1st Defendant

Steven Hok (Li Mun Hok Steven)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings (probate/estate Administration) / Costs Decision / Reasons for Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants (executors) should be ordered to pay the costs personally rather than from the estate
  2. 2 Whether the executors acted unreasonably or for their own benefit in administering the estate
  3. 3 Whether late filed evidence (5th Affirmation) should be admitted

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants wilfully forborne from administering the estate, their explanations for delay were unsatisfactory or unsupported, and therefore under Order 62 r.6(2) they acted unreasonably and must personally bear the costs of these proceedings (excluding costs already ordered payable personally dated 13 June 2006).

Court Disposition

Defendants ordered to pay the costs of these proceedings personally, except for costs already covered by the order dated 13 June 2006.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay the costs of these proceedings personally (except costs covered by order dated 13 June 2006).
  • 5th Affirmation of Dennis refused admission for being filed unreasonably late.