CHAN KWAN YIN SHIRLEY AND ANOTHER v. WU WING AND ANOTHER

CHAN KWAN YIN SHIRLEY AND ANOTHER v. WU WING AND ANOTHER

The 1st Defendant failed to prove fraudulent misrepresentation or the plea of non est factum; the evidence established that he knew the nature and effect of the documents and the Plaintiffs' witnesses were preferred; accordingly the counterclaim to set aside the 1st Assignment was dismissed and the Plaintiffs were entitled to possession and costs (order nisi).

Citation
CHAN KWAN YIN SHIRLEY AND ANOTHER v. WU WING AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: CHAN KWAN YIN SHIRLEY; 2nd Plaintiff: WU KA YEE OLIVIA; 1st Defendant: WU WING; 2nd Defendant: EVERY PERSON IN OCCUPATION OF LOT NO. 1830 RP IN D.D. 106, YUEN LONG, NEW TERRITORIES, HONG KONG
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 August 2009
Case Number
HCA7718/2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Possession and Title Dispute / Judgment (post Trial)
Outcome
Counterclaim dismissed; Plaintiffs' claim for possession allowed; costs ordered nisi in favour of Plaintiffs
Legal Topics
Possession, Title Dispute, Non Est Factum, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Deed of Assignment, Costs
Source Language
EN
Land Law Property Possession Contract Equitable Remedies Fraud Family Law Possession Title Dispute +4 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN KWAN YIN SHIRLEY

1st Plaintiff

WU KA YEE OLIVIA

2nd Plaintiff

WU WING

1st Defendant

EVERY PERSON IN OCCUPATION OF LOT NO. 1830 RP IN D.D. 106, YUEN LONG, NEW TERRITORIES, HONG KONG

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Possession and Title Dispute / Judgment (post Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Assignment was procured by fraudulent misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether the plea of non est factum excuse execution of the 1st Assignment
  3. 3 Whether Plaintiffs are entitled to possession of the Property

Ratio Decidendi

The 1st Defendant failed to prove fraudulent misrepresentation or the plea of non est factum; the evidence established that he knew the nature and effect of the documents and the Plaintiffs' witnesses were preferred; accordingly the counterclaim to set aside the 1st Assignment was dismissed and the Plaintiffs were entitled to possession and costs (order nisi).

Court Disposition

Counterclaim dismissed; Plaintiffs' claim for possession allowed; costs ordered nisi in favour of Plaintiffs

Orders

  • Order for possession in favour of the Plaintiffs in respect of Lot No. 1830 RP in D.D. 106, Yuen Long, New Territories
  • Costs order nisi: 1st Defendant to pay Plaintiffs' costs of the action, to be taxed if not agreed