CHAN SIU HAN v. TONG YUK LAN

CHAN SIU HAN v. TONG YUK LAN

The vendor was obliged to prove good title before completion by producing originals or certified true copies of title documents that relate exclusively to the property; failure to produce the three missing documents or acceptable certified copies before completion amounted to a repudiatory breach entitling the purchaser to rescind and recover the deposit; the Third Party solicitors were negligent in failing to register and timely deliver the documents and must indemnify the vendor for the loss (the refunded deposit).

Citation
CHAN SIU HAN v. TONG YUK LAN
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff (purchaser); Defendant: Defendant (vendor); Third Party: Third Party (vendor's prior solicitors)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 January 2011
Case Number
DCCJ3432/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Sale of Land (deposit Recovery) and Third Party Indemnity / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff; Plaintiff's rescission accepted; Defendant ordered to repay deposit; Third Party ordered to indemnify Defendant
Legal Topics
Proof of Title, Production of Title Deeds, Requisition Procedure, Repudiatory Breach, Refusal to Complete, Forfeiture of Deposit, Registration of Documents, Indemnity
Source Language
EN
Conveyancing Contract Law Property Law Tort Negligence Equity Proof of Title Production of Title Deeds Requisition Procedure +5 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff (purchaser)

Plaintiff

Defendant (vendor)

Defendant

Third Party (vendor's prior solicitors)

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Sale of Land (deposit Recovery) and Third Party Indemnity / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the three missing documents are documents of title or only documents affecting title
  2. 2 Whether the vendor was obliged to produce originals of the three missing documents or whether certified copies sufficed
  3. 3 Whether any obligation to produce originals had to be fulfilled before completion or could be satisfied after completion by undertaking

Ratio Decidendi

The vendor was obliged to prove good title before completion by producing originals or certified true copies of title documents that relate exclusively to the property; failure to produce the three missing documents or acceptable certified copies before completion amounted to a repudiatory breach entitling the purchaser to rescind and recover the deposit; the Third Party solicitors were negligent in failing to register and timely deliver the documents and must indemnify the vendor for the loss (the refunded deposit).

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiff; Plaintiff's rescission accepted; Defendant ordered to repay deposit; Third Party ordered to indemnify Defendant

Orders

  • Defendant to repay deposit of 138000 HKD to Plaintiff with interest at prime rate from 16 July 2008 until judgment and thereafter at judgment rate until payment
  • Damages for agreed legal costs of the aborted transaction in the sum of 5100 HKD to be paid to the Plaintiff