31 Aug 2016
The court found the defendant had no proprietary or equitable interest: transfers were made by beneficial owners and no enforceable written agreement or consideration supported the alleged oral promises; plaintiffs therefore entitled to possession and to costs on indemnity basis; no mesne profits awarded for lack of evidence.
26 Nov 2015
The plaintiff's claims based on alleged oral agreements to transfer or gift land were unenforceable under Conveyancing and Property Ordinance s3(1) because there was no written agreement or memorandum; on the counterclaim the court found that the defendants were the sole beneficial owners and that the plaintiff held the Ting House and Lot on trust for them, therefore granting a declaration and ordering transfer of legal title; costs were awarded on an indemnity basis due to the plaintiff's continued prosecution of an unsustainable claim after clear warning and failure to defend the countercla…
14 Aug 2006
The court held plaintiffs wrongfully repudiated the contracts in 2001. No enforceable oral one‑year completion term was proved and, in any event, any oral promise would be unenforceable under s3(1) CPO. No term that completion occur within a reasonable time was to be implied given the known requirement for government approvals; the implied obligation to exercise due and reasonable diligence was not breached because the defendant reasonably pursued private EVA options and then the government road and submitted proposals promptly when draft plans became available; the EVA imposition did not fru…