SZETO YUK LIN v. TSANG CHIU MO SAMUEL AND OTHERS

SZETO YUK LIN v. TSANG CHIU MO SAMUEL AND OTHERS

Registrar's refusal of leave to amend paras 5, 5A, 5B and 9A–9D was upheld because the proposed amendments failed to plead required particulars (identification of the funds, amounts and how they purchased specific assets), were inconsistent with existing pleadings and were embarrassing; proposed para 25A (gist of minutes admitting trusts) was sufficiently pleaded under Ord 18 r 7(2) and may be allowed.

Citation
SZETO YUK LIN v. TSANG CHIU MO SAMUEL AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action) and 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim): Szeto Yuk-Lin; 1st Defendant (original Action) and 1st Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): Tsang Chiu Mo Samuel; 2nd Defendant (original Action) and 2nd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): Tsang Chiu Ching; 3rd Defendant (original Action) and 3rd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): Tsang Chiu Yuen Sylvia; 4th Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): ST Investments Holding Limited; 2nd Defendant (by Counterclaim): Szeto Estates Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 December 2013
Case Number
HCA2392/2008
Procedural Posture
High Court Action Appeal Against Registrar's Order Refusing Leave to Amend / Interlocutory Appeal in Chambers (leave to Amend)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed except as to proposed para 25A; leave to amend refused for specified parts; costs awarded to respondents (defendants) in the proportions stated.
Legal Topics
Resulting Trust, Leave to Amend Pleadings, Pleading Particulars, Settlement Agreement, Costs
Source Language
EN
Trusts Equity Civil Procedure Property Law Family Law Resulting Trust Leave to Amend Pleadings Pleading Particulars +2 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 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Szeto Yuk-Lin

Plaintiff (original Action) and 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim)

Tsang Chiu Mo Samuel

1st Defendant (original Action) and 1st Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

Tsang Chiu Ching

2nd Defendant (original Action) and 2nd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

Tsang Chiu Yuen Sylvia

3rd Defendant (original Action) and 3rd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

ST Investments Holding Limited

4th Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

Szeto Estates Limited

2nd Defendant (by Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

High Court Action Appeal Against Registrar's Order Refusing Leave to Amend / Interlocutory Appeal in Chambers (leave to Amend)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed amendments pleading resulting trusts contained sufficient particulars to ground a cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the applicant must identify the nature and amounts of payments and how they relate to specific property to plead a resulting trust
  3. 3 Whether proposed amendments were embarrassing or inconsistent with existing pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

Registrar's refusal of leave to amend paras 5, 5A, 5B and 9A–9D was upheld because the proposed amendments failed to plead required particulars (identification of the funds, amounts and how they purchased specific assets), were inconsistent with existing pleadings and were embarrassing; proposed para 25A (gist of minutes admitting trusts) was sufficiently pleaded under Ord 18 r 7(2) and may be allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed except as to proposed para 25A; leave to amend refused for specified parts; costs awarded to respondents (defendants) in the proportions stated.

Orders

  • Leave to amend refused in respect of proposed paras 5, 5A and 5B
  • Leave to amend refused in respect of proposed paras 9A to 9D