TSANG KIU 對 FULLAND INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS

TSANG KIU 對 FULLAND INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any ground with a reasonable prospect of success under s63A(2); the trial judge had considered the evidence and reasonably concluded the applicant's evidence was inconsistent, unreliable and insufficient to prove possession of the brown and green lands.

Citation
[2019] HKDC 1369
Parties
Plaintiff: TSANG KIU; First Defendant: FULLAND INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; Second Defendant: LAU NG MUI CHU; LAU LAI FAN BEATRIX; LAU LAI WAH PAULINE (representatives of the estate of LAU WONG FAT, deceased); Third Defendant: TANG KU YAM TSO (suspended; TANG CHUN KEE as manager)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 October 2019
Case Number
DCCJ1791/2012
Procedural Posture
Adverse Possession / Leave to Appeal Application After Judgment (district Court) Dealt With on Written Submissions
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Leave to Appeal, Witness Credibility, Expert Evidence, Costs
Source Language
CH
Property Law Civil Procedure Evidence Adverse Possession Leave to Appeal Witness Credibility Expert Evidence Costs

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TSANG KIU

Plaintiff

FULLAND INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

First Defendant

LAU NG MUI CHU; LAU LAI FAN BEATRIX; LAU LAI WAH PAULINE (representatives of the estate of LAU WONG FAT, deceased)

Second Defendant

TANG KU YAM TSO (suspended; TANG CHUN KEE as manager)

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Adverse Possession / Leave to Appeal Application After Judgment (district Court) Dealt With on Written Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated a reasonable prospect of success for an appeal under s63A(2) of the District Court Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge failed to consider the applicant's health and demeanour when assessing evidence
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge failed to consider photographs, maps and other documentary evidence regarding enclosure and structures on the green land

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any ground with a reasonable prospect of success under s63A(2); the trial judge had considered the evidence and reasonably concluded the applicant's evidence was inconsistent, unreliable and insufficient to prove possession of the brown and green lands.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal application dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay defendants' costs assessed on party-party basis; solicitors' certificate issued; costs assessed at HKD 43000; payment to be made within 14 days from the date of judgment