KONG HON KUI THOMAS and KONG HON QUAN MARIUS (Administrators of the Estate of Kong So Ngo, Deceased) v. WU YUK CHUN JUDY AND ANOTHER
An interim stay of execution was justified in relation to the Possession Order because without it the appeal risked being rendered nugatory and the applicant would suffer disproportionate inconvenience, but the stay must be conditional on payment into court to protect the respondents; accordingly the court granted an interim stay of the Possession Order until the appeal hearing subject to D1 paying HK$200,000 into court within 21 days and refused stays in respect of the other orders because the applicant failed to show inability to pay or sufficient grounds for those orders to be stayed.
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2416
- Parties
- Plaintiffs: KONG HON KUI THOMAS and KONG HON QUAN MARIUS (Administrators of the Estate of Kong So Ngo, Deceased); 1st Defendant: WU YUK CHUN JUDY; 2nd Defendant: ALL PERSONS IN OCCUPATION OF 2nd FLOOR, BOTANICAL COURT, NO. 5 CAINE ROAD, HONG KONG
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 8 October 2019
- Case Number
- HCA350/2013
- Procedural Posture
- Action No 350 of 2013 (possession and Related Reliefs) / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal After Judgment
- Outcome
- Interim stay of execution granted in respect of the Possession Order only, until the hearing of the appeal, conditional on payment of HK$200,000 into court by 3 October 2019; no stay granted for the Mesne Profits Order, Account Order or Chattels Order; costs in the cause of the appeal.
- Legal Topics
- Possession, Stay of Execution, Mesne Profits, Accounts, Chattels, Appeal
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
KONG HON KUI THOMAS and KONG HON QUAN MARIUS (Administrators of the Estate of Kong So Ngo, Deceased)
Plaintiffs
WU YUK CHUN JUDY
1st Defendant
ALL PERSONS IN OCCUPATION OF 2nd FLOOR, BOTANICAL COURT, NO. 5 CAINE ROAD, HONG KONG
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Action No 350 of 2013 (possession and Related Reliefs) / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal After Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a stay of execution pending appeal should be granted in respect of the Possession Order
- 2 Whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory without a stay
- 3 Whether security should be required as a condition for a stay and the amount of such security
Ratio Decidendi
An interim stay of execution was justified in relation to the Possession Order because without it the appeal risked being rendered nugatory and the applicant would suffer disproportionate inconvenience, but the stay must be conditional on payment into court to protect the respondents; accordingly the court granted an interim stay of the Possession Order until the appeal hearing subject to D1 paying HK$200,000 into court within 21 days and refused stays in respect of the other orders because the applicant failed to show inability to pay or sufficient grounds for those orders to be stayed.
Court Disposition
Interim stay of execution granted in respect of the Possession Order only, until the hearing of the appeal, conditional on payment of HK$200,000 into court by 3 October 2019; no stay granted for the Mesne Profits Order, Account Order or Chattels Order; costs in the cause of the appeal.
Orders
- Interim stay granted in respect of paragraph 2 (Possession Order) of the Judgment until the hearing of the appeal
- Condition: 1st Defendant to pay into court HK$200,000 within 21 days (on or before 3 October 2019)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment