TSANG WING KIT ERIC and TSANG CHI PING suing as the Managers of SAM TSOI & CO. v. LEE YUK SUN

TSANG WING KIT ERIC and TSANG CHI PING suing as the Managers of SAM TSOI & CO. v. LEE YUK SUN

The Court held Plaintiffs had established a prima facie entitlement to the declaration that they were entitled to re‑possess the unresumed portion immediately before the 2022 resumption; the defendant failed to demonstrate any triable issue or arguable defence (waiver, acquiescence, laches or estoppel) sufficient to defeat summary judgment, the dispute was not academic as it affected the Good Title Warranty and compensation, and there was no abuse of process. Accordingly summary judgment was granted and Declaration 2 awarded.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 2101
Parties
Plaintiff: Tsang Wing Kit Eric; Plaintiff: Tsang Chi Ping; Defendant (deceased): Lee Yuk Sun; Defendant (person Appointed to Represent Estate): Ho Siu Ching
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 April 2026
Case Number
HCA117/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Possession and Declaratory Relief (land/resumption) / Summary Judgment Hearing (order 14 Application)
Outcome
Application for summary judgment allowed; Declaration 2 granted
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Declaratory Relief, Possession, Good Title Warranty, Estoppel, Waiver, Laches, Abuse of Process
Source Language
EN
Property Law Land Resumption/compensation Tort (trespass) Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Declaratory Relief Possession Good Title Warranty +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tsang Wing Kit Eric

Plaintiff

Tsang Chi Ping

Plaintiff

Lee Yuk Sun

Defendant (deceased)

Ho Siu Ching

Defendant (person Appointed to Represent Estate)

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Possession and Declaratory Relief (land/resumption) / Summary Judgment Hearing (order 14 Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Plaintiffs were entitled to re-possess the unresumed portion of the subject land immediately before the 2022 resumption (17 September 2022)
  2. 2 Whether the declaratory relief sought was non‑academic and whether the defendant was a proper contradictor
  3. 3 Whether the defendant raised triable issues or arguable defences (waiver, acquiescence, laches, estoppel) sufficient to defeat summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held Plaintiffs had established a prima facie entitlement to the declaration that they were entitled to re‑possess the unresumed portion immediately before the 2022 resumption; the defendant failed to demonstrate any triable issue or arguable defence (waiver, acquiescence, laches or estoppel) sufficient to defeat summary judgment, the dispute was not academic as it affected the Good Title Warranty and compensation, and there was no abuse of process. Accordingly summary judgment was granted and Declaration 2 awarded.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment allowed; Declaration 2 granted

Orders

  • Declaration 2 granted: Immediately prior to the reversion of the unresumed portion of the subject land to the Government on 17 September 2022, the Plaintiffs were entitled to re‑possess the unresumed portion
  • Summary judgment entered for the Plaintiffs on the declared entitlement