RE TU SOKHA

Because the applicant provided evidence of a declaration of trust in 1972, exclusive possession since that time, and satisfactory proof that the trustee cannot be found and is out of the jurisdiction, the court was entitled to grant a vesting order under section 45(b) of the Trustee Ordinance in favour of the applicant.

Citation: RE TU SOKHA
Parties: Applicant: Tu Sokha; Trustee/respondent (cannot Be Found/out of Jurisdiction): Father of Tu Sokha (name unknown)
Court: Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction: Hong Kong
Judgment Date: 13 July 2010
Case Number: HCMP1101/2010
Procedural Posture: Application Under Trustee Ordinance for Vesting Order / Judgment
Outcome: Vesting order granted in favour of the applicant; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics: Vesting Order, Absentee Trustee, Declaration of Trust, Possession
Source Language: EN

Trusts Property Civil Procedure Vesting Order Absentee Trustee Declaration of Trust Possession

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Tu Sokha

Applicant

Father of Tu Sokha (name unknown)

Trustee/respondent (cannot Be Found/out of Jurisdiction)

Procedural Posture

Application Under Trustee Ordinance for Vesting Order / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the trustee (the applicant's father) cannot be found and is out of the jurisdiction
2 Whether a vesting order should be made under section 45(b) of the Trustee Ordinance in favour of the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Vesting order granted in favour of the applicant; no order as to costs.

Orders

Order made in terms of paragraph (a) of the originating summons (vesting order under section 45(b) Trustee Ordinance, Cap.29)
No order as to costs