LEUNG WAI IP v. CHAN MING FAI

LEUNG WAI IP v. CHAN MING FAI

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the judge found no tenancy existed: the defendant's pleadings affirm relationships (purchase/licence) inconsistent with an exclusive periodic tenancy, the defendant failed to plead a tenancy as required by the Rules, and a purported tenancy for an indefinite/uncertain term is void and treated as a licence so s.12(2) did not make the defendant's possession adverse.

Citation
LEUNG WAI IP v. CHAN MING FAI
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 August 2016
Case Number
DCCJ677/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Recovery of Land / Application for Leave to Appeal (chambers Hearing)
Outcome
application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Tenancy Vs Licence, Statutory Limitation (s.12(2) Limitation Ordinance), Pleadings
Source Language
EN
Land Law Civil Procedure Property Equity Adverse Possession Tenancy Vs Licence Statutory Limitation (s.12(2) Limitation Ordinance) Pleadings

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Recovery of Land / Application for Leave to Appeal (chambers Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral monthly periodic tenancy was created between the parties
  2. 2 Whether a tenancy need be specifically pleaded in an action for recovery of land
  3. 3 Whether s.12(2) Limitation Ordinance operates to deem possession adverse where tenancy was not in writing

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the judge found no tenancy existed: the defendant's pleadings affirm relationships (purchase/licence) inconsistent with an exclusive periodic tenancy, the defendant failed to plead a tenancy as required by the Rules, and a purported tenancy for an indefinite/uncertain term is void and treated as a licence so s.12(2) did not make the defendant's possession adverse.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused
  • Costs to follow the event