TSUEN WAN PROPERTIES LTD. V. PAN WILL LTD.

TSUEN WAN PROPERTIES LTD. V. PAN WILL LTD.

The Court found as a fact that the colouring of the plans mistakenly included both the staircase and the entrance strip; the Plaintiffs proved the mistake and their true intention to reserve those areas to the supermarket purchaser; the Defendant's contrary evidence was rejected as unreliable; accordingly equitable rectification of the assignment was granted to reflect the parties' true common intention.

Citation
TSUEN WAN PROPERTIES LTD. V. PAN WILL LTD.
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Tsuen Wan Properties Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Riviera Gardens Investments Limited; 3rd Plaintiff: Treasure Bright Limited; 4th Plaintiff: New World Development Company Limited; 5th Plaintiff: Birkenshaw Limited; Defendant: Pan Will Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 March 1993
Case Number
HCMP2637/1992
Procedural Posture
Rectification of Assignment (miscellaneous Proceedings, High Court) / Judgment Delivered (2 March 1993)
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiffs; rectification granted to exclude staircase and entrance strip from the assignment; costs awarded to Plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Rectification, Mistake, Representation, Assignment of Property, Vacant Possession
Source Language
EN
Property Equity Contract Conveyancing Rectification Mistake Representation Assignment of Property +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tsuen Wan Properties Limited

1st Plaintiff

Riviera Gardens Investments Limited

2nd Plaintiff

Treasure Bright Limited

3rd Plaintiff

New World Development Company Limited

4th Plaintiff

Birkenshaw Limited

5th Plaintiff

Pan Will Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Rectification of Assignment (miscellaneous Proceedings, High Court) / Judgment Delivered (2 March 1993)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plan attached to the assignment should be rectified to exclude the staircase and the entrance strip
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant acquired the entrance strip by representation or whether its inclusion was a mistake
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiffs discharged the burden to obtain equitable rectification

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found as a fact that the colouring of the plans mistakenly included both the staircase and the entrance strip; the Plaintiffs proved the mistake and their true intention to reserve those areas to the supermarket purchaser; the Defendant's contrary evidence was rejected as unreliable; accordingly equitable rectification of the assignment was granted to reflect the parties' true common intention.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiffs; rectification granted to exclude staircase and entrance strip from the assignment; costs awarded to Plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Order for rectification of the assignment by substituting a plan excluding the staircase and the entrance strip
  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiffs as claimed in paragraph (i) of the prayer