KONG KING ONG ALEXANDER v. KAN HEUNG WING AND ANOTHER

KONG KING ONG ALEXANDER v. KAN HEUNG WING AND ANOTHER

Summary judgment was refused because the Vendors' asserted defences raised triable issues of fact and law (whether SPA and SSPAs formed part of the title deeds and whether Vendors had satisfactorily answered reasonable requisitions); consequently the Purchaser had an arguable defence to the counterclaim and an arguable claim in the original action, and unconditional leave to defend was granted so the matters can be tried together.

Citation
KONG KING ONG ALEXANDER v. KAN HEUNG WING AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim): KONG KING ONG ALEXANDER; 1st Defendant (original Action); 1st Plaintiff (counterclaim): KAN HEUNG WING; 2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim): YANG YOU MEI; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): WONG & POON (a firm)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 April 2013
Case Number
DCCJ3724/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Conveyancing / Sale of Land; Counterclaim and Original Action; Summary Judgment Application / Summary Judgment Application / Decision on Leave to Defend; Order Nisi on Costs
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed as to Purchaser; Purchaser given unconditional leave to defend the Vendors' counterclaim; trial ordered between Vendors and Purchaser (and related claim against solicitors)
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Forfeiture of Deposit, Production of Title Deeds, Proving and Giving Title, Requisitions as to Title, Merger of Agreements, Statutory Conditions on Payment
Source Language
EN
Conveyancing Property Law Civil Procedure Contract Law Equity Summary Judgment Forfeiture of Deposit Production of Title Deeds +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KONG KING ONG ALEXANDER

Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim)

KAN HEUNG WING

1st Defendant (original Action); 1st Plaintiff (counterclaim)

YANG YOU MEI

2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim)

WONG & POON (a firm)

2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Conveyancing / Sale of Land; Counterclaim and Original Action; Summary Judgment Application / Summary Judgment Application / Decision on Leave to Defend; Order Nisi on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Vendors entitled to forfeit Purchaser's deposit for wrongful repudiation
  2. 2 Whether Vendors were obliged to produce the SPA (1967) and two SSPAs (1996,1997) as part of giving title
  3. 3 Whether Vendors were obliged to respond to the 2nd set of requisitions raised 9 July 2008 (timeliness)

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was refused because the Vendors' asserted defences raised triable issues of fact and law (whether SPA and SSPAs formed part of the title deeds and whether Vendors had satisfactorily answered reasonable requisitions); consequently the Purchaser had an arguable defence to the counterclaim and an arguable claim in the original action, and unconditional leave to defend was granted so the matters can be tried together.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed as to Purchaser; Purchaser given unconditional leave to defend the Vendors' counterclaim; trial ordered between Vendors and Purchaser (and related claim against solicitors)

Orders

  • Unconditional leave granted to the Purchaser to defend the Vendors' counterclaim
  • Order nisi that the Purchaser's costs in this application, if any, be paid by the Vendors in any event, to be taxed if not agreed