TO HIN CHEUNG AND OTHERS v. All occupier(s) of a portion of Lot No 240 in Demarcation District No 128, Yuen Long, New Territories Hong Kong AND ANOTHER
The 2nd defendant failed to discharge the heavy burden to prove adverse possession: contemporaneous evidence (notably an electricity bill showing zero consumption for about 17 months), lack of corroborating witnesses and documents, and unreliable testimony meant factual possession and animus possidendi were not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- TO HIN CHEUNG AND OTHERS v. All occupier(s) of a portion of Lot No 240 in Demarcation District No 128, Yuen Long, New Territories Hong Kong AND ANOTHER
- Parties
- Plaintiff: To Hin Cheung; Plaintiff: To Chi Cheung; Plaintiff: To Shiu Cheung; 1st Defendant: All occupier(s) of a portion of Lot No 240 in Demarcation District No 128, Yuen Long, New Territories, Hong Kong; 2nd Defendant: Chan Wai Keung
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 16 April 2013
- Case Number
- DCMP1288/2011
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Proceedings (district Court) Adverse Possession/possession Claim / Judgment (16 April 2013)
- Outcome
- Judgment for plaintiffs; 2nd defendant's counterclaim dismissed; order for delivery of vacant possession to plaintiffs; plaintiffs awarded costs.
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Factual Possession, Animus Possidendi, Title Extinguishment, Vacant Possession, Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
To Hin Cheung
Plaintiff
To Chi Cheung
Plaintiff
To Shiu Cheung
Plaintiff
All occupier(s) of a portion of Lot No 240 in Demarcation District No 128, Yuen Long, New Territories, Hong Kong
1st Defendant
Chan Wai Keung
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (district Court) Adverse Possession/possession Claim / Judgment (16 April 2013)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 2nd defendant established factual possession of the Subject Portion for the requisite period.
- 2 Whether the 2nd defendant demonstrated the requisite intention to possess (animus possidendi) to exclude the owner.
- 3 Whether the plaintiffs' title to the Subject Portion was extinguished and whether the 2nd defendant acquired possessory title.
Ratio Decidendi
The 2nd defendant failed to discharge the heavy burden to prove adverse possession: contemporaneous evidence (notably an electricity bill showing zero consumption for about 17 months), lack of corroborating witnesses and documents, and unreliable testimony meant factual possession and animus possidendi were not established; accordingly the plaintiffs' claim for possession succeeded and the 2nd defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Judgment for plaintiffs; 2nd defendant's counterclaim dismissed; order for delivery of vacant possession to plaintiffs; plaintiffs awarded costs.
Orders
- That the 2nd defendant do deliver to the plaintiffs vacant possession of the Subject Portion.
- That the 2nd defendant's counterclaim be dismissed.
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