MAN FUNG CHOY v. MAN SHING LI

MAN FUNG CHOY v. MAN SHING LI

The appeal was allowed because the plaintiff's pleadings contained material inconsistencies and bare assertions that deprived the defendant of necessary information to prepare his defence; accordingly the plaintiff was ordered to provide specified further and better particulars within a fixed time and to pay party and party costs (order nisi).

Citation
MAN FUNG CHOY v. MAN SHING LI
Parties
Plaintiff; Executrix and Sole Beneficiary of the Estate of Wong Yuen Yin (deceased): Man Fung Choy; Defendant; Alleged Adopted Son of the Plaintiff's Father: Man Shing Li alias Man Tat Ying
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 June 2001
Case Number
HCA9907/1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (trusts/probate/property) / Interlocutory Appeal Against Master's Refusal to Order Further and Better Particulars; Hearing in Chambers (29 May 2001); Judgment Handed Down 5 June 2001
Outcome
Appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Particulars of Claim, Pleading Consistency, Constructive Trust, Statutory Succession Under New Territories Ordinance S.17, Account and Enquiry, Registration of Membership in Unincorporated Association (wui)
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Trusts Probate Property Law Succession Law Particulars of Claim Pleading Consistency Constructive Trust +3 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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Man Fung Choy

Plaintiff; Executrix and Sole Beneficiary of the Estate of Wong Yuen Yin (deceased)

Man Shing Li alias Man Tat Ying

Defendant; Alleged Adopted Son of the Plaintiff's Father

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (trusts/probate/property) / Interlocutory Appeal Against Master's Refusal to Order Further and Better Particulars; Hearing in Chambers (29 May 2001); Judgment Handed Down 5 June 2001

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff must provide further and better particulars to the defendant under paragraphs 9, 15 and 16 of the Re‑amended Statement of Claim
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's pleadings are inconsistent and contain bare assertions that impede the defendant's ability to prepare a defence
  3. 3 Whether the membership interest in the Wui is subject to statutory succession under s.17 of the New Territories Ordinance or analogous to profit‑a‑prendre

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the plaintiff's pleadings contained material inconsistencies and bare assertions that deprived the defendant of necessary information to prepare his defence; accordingly the plaintiff was ordered to provide specified further and better particulars within a fixed time and to pay party and party costs (order nisi).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of the order of the learned Master dated 23 March 2001 be set aside.
  • The plaintiff to provide the Further and Better Particulars requested in the Request for Further and Better Particulars of the Re‑amended Statement of Claim dated 3 January 2001 within seven days from the date of the order.