TANG KA HUNG ROBERT AND ANOTHER v. TANG TIM CHUE AND ANOTHER

TANG KA HUNG ROBERT AND ANOTHER v. TANG TIM CHUE AND ANOTHER

Defendants failed to prove authorization by the deceased and failed to prove any valid lease; defendants' evidence was inconsistent and unreliable; consequently plaintiffs, as executors and registered owners, are entitled to possession, a permanent injunction and nominal damages of HK$10,000, with costs nisi.

Citation
TANG KA HUNG ROBERT AND ANOTHER v. TANG TIM CHUE AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiffs (executors of the Estate of Tang Sum on Alias Tang Sam On, Deceased): Tang Ka Hung Robert and Tang Mei Sze; 1st Defendant: Tang Tim Chue alias Tang Tim Chu; 2nd Defendant: Lam Kuen
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 April 2010
Case Number
HCA3/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (possession/trespass) High Court, Court of First Instance Action No.3 of 2006 / Judgment (trial Concluded)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiffs: declaration of entitlement to possession; permanent injunction; nominal damages HK$10,000; costs ordered nisi.
Legal Topics
Possession, Trespass, Tenancy, Agency/authorization, Lease Formalities, Probate Dispute, Nominal Damages, Costs
Source Language
EN
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Probate Civil Procedure Injunctions Trespass Conveyancing Possession +6 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tang Ka Hung Robert and Tang Mei Sze

Plaintiffs (executors of the Estate of Tang Sum on Alias Tang Sam On, Deceased)

Tang Tim Chue alias Tang Tim Chu

1st Defendant

Lam Kuen

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (possession/trespass) High Court, Court of First Instance Action No.3 of 2006 / Judgment (trial Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd defendant was a lawful tenant of the Land
  2. 2 Whether the 1st defendant was authorized by the deceased to act as agent in relation to the Land
  3. 3 Whether alleged renewals and tenancy documents were valid and genuine

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants failed to prove authorization by the deceased and failed to prove any valid lease; defendants' evidence was inconsistent and unreliable; consequently plaintiffs, as executors and registered owners, are entitled to possession, a permanent injunction and nominal damages of HK$10,000, with costs nisi.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiffs: declaration of entitlement to possession; permanent injunction; nominal damages HK$10,000; costs ordered nisi.

Orders

  • Declaration that plaintiffs as executors are entitled to take possession of and occupy the Land to the exclusion of the defendants
  • Permanent injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants and their agents from trespassing the Land or causing damage or nuisance thereto