TO LEE WAH SAMUEL v. YUM HUIN MING AND ANOTHER

TO LEE WAH SAMUEL v. YUM HUIN MING AND ANOTHER

On the evidence the plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the donor lacked the requisite mental capacity to execute either the 1st (3 Nov 2015) or the 2nd (26 Jan 2018) enduring powers of attorney; the burden of proof lay on the plaintiff, the contested expert assessments called by plaintiff were found unreliable, and the contemporaneous certified medical and solicitor evidence supporting validity was accepted.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1441
Parties
Plaintiff: To Lee Wah Samuel; 1st Defendant: Yum Huin Ming; 2nd Defendant: To Lai Wing Oliver
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 June 2019
Case Number
HCA1469/2018
Procedural Posture
Validity Challenge to Enduring Powers of Attorney / Judgment After Trial (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed; HCMH 62/2017 dismissed
Legal Topics
Enduring Power of Attorney, Mental Capacity, Burden of Proof, Medical Evidence, Registration and Certification
Source Language
EN
Capacity Law Wills and Estate Mental Health Law Civil Procedure Enduring Power of Attorney Mental Capacity Burden of Proof Medical Evidence +1 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

To Lee Wah Samuel

Plaintiff

Yum Huin Ming

1st Defendant

To Lai Wing Oliver

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Validity Challenge to Enduring Powers of Attorney / Judgment After Trial (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the donor (1st defendant) had the mental capacity within the meaning of s2 of the Enduring Powers of Attorney Ordinance to execute the 1st and 2nd EPoAs
  2. 2 Which party bears the burden of proof on capacity in a challenge to validity of an EPoA
  3. 3 Reliability and admissibility of competing medical evidence (MMSEs and expert reports) including allegations of coaching/drilling

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence the plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the donor lacked the requisite mental capacity to execute either the 1st (3 Nov 2015) or the 2nd (26 Jan 2018) enduring powers of attorney; the burden of proof lay on the plaintiff, the contested expert assessments called by plaintiff were found unreliable, and the contemporaneous certified medical and solicitor evidence supporting validity was accepted.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed; HCMH 62/2017 dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • HCMH 62/2017 dismissed