PANG MA FOOK AND ANOTHER v. PANG YU FAT ALSO KNOWN AS PANG YI FAT

PANG MA FOOK AND ANOTHER v. PANG YU FAT ALSO KNOWN AS PANG YI FAT

The court declined to grant the declaratory relief in default because the Statement of Claim lacked requisite particulars to establish continuous exclusive possession for the statutory period and, given the plaintiffs' extended periods outside Hong Kong and the present evidence the land was barren, it was not appropriate to exercise the discretionary power under Order 19 r.7 to enter judgment without hearing evidence; the plaintiffs must prove their entitlement at trial.

Citation
PANG MA FOOK AND ANOTHER v. PANG YU FAT ALSO KNOWN AS PANG YI FAT
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiffs; Defendant: Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 February 2016
Case Number
DCCJ3192/2015
Procedural Posture
Adverse Possession / Application for Judgment in Default of Defence
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Declaratory Relief, Limitation Ordinance Ss 7 & 17, Substituted Service, Default Judgment
Source Language
EN
Property Law Civil Procedure Land Registration Limitation Law Adverse Possession Declaratory Relief Limitation Ordinance Ss 7 & 17 Substituted Service +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Adverse Possession / Application for Judgment in Default of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs established uninterrupted, continuous and exclusive possession of the land for the statutory period to extinguish the defendant's title
  2. 2 Whether the Statement of Claim contained sufficient particulars to justify a declaratory judgment in default of defence
  3. 3 Whether it was appropriate to grant the declaratory relief on the papers without hearing oral or affidavit evidence given the plaintiffs' periods abroad and the present condition of the land

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to grant the declaratory relief in default because the Statement of Claim lacked requisite particulars to establish continuous exclusive possession for the statutory period and, given the plaintiffs' extended periods outside Hong Kong and the present evidence the land was barren, it was not appropriate to exercise the discretionary power under Order 19 r.7 to enter judgment without hearing evidence; the plaintiffs must prove their entitlement at trial.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • No order as to costs of this application, including the hearing today