Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Conveyancing and property ordinance s.13

Legal area

Court

10 Oct 2005

C & W WATCH CO LTD v. CHU KWOK TAI

Citation

C & W WATCH CO LTD v. CHU KWOK TAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP920/2005

Agreement cl.6(a) manifested a contrary intention to CPO s.13 by requiring title to be proved commencing with the Government Lease; therefore the purchaser was entitled to request the eight original documents, the vendor's failure to produce them or provide a statutory declaration was a breach permitting the purchaser to treat the contract as rescinded, and the purchaser is entitled to return of the $107,000 deposit while the vendor's counterclaim for damages is dismissed (claimed damages were less than the deposit).
8 Nov 2000

LAM YUN WAH DOMINIC AND ANOTHER v. CHAN KAN HEI AND ANOTHER

Citation

LAM YUN WAH DOMINIC AND ANOTHER v. CHAN KAN HEI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV283/2000

The Court allowed the plaintiffs' appeal, holding that Stone J erred in granting enlargement of time because he failed to take into account the significant prejudice to the plaintiffs and there was no satisfactory explanation for the defendants' delay after learning of the change in law; a change in the law alone does not justify enlargement of time and therefore the Registrar's order is restored.
23 Nov 1999

IP FOO KEUNG MICHAEL AND ANOTHER v. CHAN PAK KAI

Citation

IP FOO KEUNG MICHAEL AND ANOTHER v. CHAN PAK KAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV273/1999

Section 13 does not exclude the common law rule permitting clear and cogent secondary evidence of lost documents; a purchaser is bound to accept sufficient secondary evidence of the contents of a missing root document or power of attorney, but where the vendor's secondary evidence fails to prove due execution (as in the missing power of attorney in the second case) the purchaser is entitled to rescind; the s.23 presumption does not rescue proof of due execution where the instrument cannot be produced if secondary evidence of due execution is lacking.
23 Nov 1999

WU WING KUEN v. LEUNG KWAI LIN CINDY

Citation

WU WING KUEN v. LEUNG KWAI LIN CINDY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV240/1999

Section 13 of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance does not abolish the common‑law rule permitting secondary evidence of lost title documents; vendors may prove title by clear and cogent secondary evidence of contents and due execution when originals are lost, but where a material instrument is missing the secondary evidence must include proof of due execution; the statutory presumption in s.23 cannot be used, where the instrument cannot be produced at all, to dispense with the requirement to prove due execution (majority on that point).
5 Jun 1997

DAWSON PROPERTIES LTD v. HONG KONG NIIROKU LTD

Citation

DAWSON PROPERTIES LTD v. HONG KONG NIIROKU LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP3232/1996

Compliance with s.13(1) of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance, including production of the Crown Lease and the intermediate root, discharges the vendor's contractual obligation to show good title in this context; purchaser's late requisition was out of time and sending the draft assignment implied acceptance of title, therefore the vendor had shown good title on the preliminary issue.
14 May 1996

GRAND MONEY LTD. v. TANG TAK SHUN

Citation

GRAND MONEY LTD. v. TANG TAK SHUN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA7791/1995

The Deed of Surrender operated to vary the provisions of the 1940 Crown Lease in relation to the remaining portion of Inland Lot No.5457 and therefore fell within the expanded definition of 'Crown Lease' under Cap.1 s.3 and was a document required by s.13 Cap.219; the defendant's refusal to produce the Deed constituted a failure to show and prove title and the plaintiff had not waived the requisition, warranting judgment for refund of the deposit and liquidated damages.

Hong Kong Case Law

C & W WATCH CO LTD v. CHU KWOK TAI

LAM YUN WAH DOMINIC AND ANOTHER v. CHAN KAN HEI AND ANOTHER

IP FOO KEUNG MICHAEL AND ANOTHER v. CHAN PAK KAI

WU WING KUEN v. LEUNG KWAI LIN CINDY

DAWSON PROPERTIES LTD v. HONG KONG NIIROKU LTD

GRAND MONEY LTD. v. TANG TAK SHUN