YIP YAN CHEUNG GARY also known as YIP YAN CHEUNG v. CHOW TIN CHOI

YIP YAN CHEUNG GARY also known as YIP YAN CHEUNG v. CHOW TIN CHOI

Court found on balance that an oral lease existed 1964-1976 and an oral licence was granted in 1976 and terminated in 1981; despite plaintiff's belief the land was vacant, aerial photographs and other evidence showed the defendant and family continued cultivation and human activity from the 1980s onward, establishing factual possession and animus possidendi; by operation of s38A the plaintiff's title was extinguished after 2001 and the defendant acquired possessory title; plaintiff's claim dismissed and defendant's counterclaim allowed.

Citation
YIP YAN CHEUNG GARY also known as YIP YAN CHEUNG v. CHOW TIN CHOI
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 July 2015
Case Number
DCCJ2645/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Recovery of Land (possession) / Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed; judgment entered for defendant on counterclaim declaring plaintiff's rights statute-barred and defendant in adverse possession
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation Period, Oral Licence, Mesne Profits, Vacant Possession
Source Language
EN
Property Limitation Law Equity Adverse Possession Limitation Period Oral Licence Mesne Profits Vacant Possession

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Recovery of Land (possession) / Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral lease existed between 1964 and 1976
  2. 2 Whether an oral licence was granted between 1976 and 1981 and whether it was terminated in 1981
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff repossessed the Subject Lands in 1981

Ratio Decidendi

Court found on balance that an oral lease existed 1964-1976 and an oral licence was granted in 1976 and terminated in 1981; despite plaintiff's belief the land was vacant, aerial photographs and other evidence showed the defendant and family continued cultivation and human activity from the 1980s onward, establishing factual possession and animus possidendi; by operation of s38A the plaintiff's title was extinguished after 2001 and the defendant acquired possessory title; plaintiff's claim dismissed and defendant's counterclaim allowed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed; judgment entered for defendant on counterclaim declaring plaintiff's rights statute-barred and defendant in adverse possession

Orders

  • Declaration that the plaintiff's and/or predecessor's rights to recover the Subject Lands are statute-barred and their titles extinguished under Limitation Ordinance s17
  • Declaration that the defendant was and is in adverse possession of the Subject Lands and has acquired possessory title thereto