Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Home ownership scheme restrictions

Legal area

Court

6 Aug 2025

LEUNG LUEN KAI v. HIGASHIGI INDUSTRIAL COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3357
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP872/2025

The Loan Agreement is void and illegal under s17B and the Schedule to the Housing Ordinance because the premium was not paid and no Director approval was obtained; as such it did not create a registrable interest affecting land and the Court, exercising its inherent jurisdiction and having been satisfied that service was properly effected and that the balance of convenience favours the applicant, ordered the registration vacated.
28 Jun 2024

HUI LONG TING v. AU SIU CHUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1734
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI218/2022

The summons for a Mareva injunction was dismissed because, despite a default interlocutory judgment on liability, the plaintiff failed to prove a real risk of dissipation of the targeted asset: the land search showed no dealings, the Property is subject to Home Ownership Scheme restrictions making disposal not straightforward, and default alone is insufficient to demonstrate the required risk; therefore it was improper to exercise the court’s discretion to grant the injunction.
8 Sept 2021

CHAU KAI CHUEN PHILIP v. CHOW YING, THE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF CHOW KAI BING, THE DECEASED

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2780
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP916/2019

On the evidence the plaintiff provided the funds for purchase and no contrary evidence was presented; beneficiaries of the deceased's estate consented and the Official Receiver lodged no claim; consistent authority establishes that resulting trusts can create equitable interests notwithstanding Home Ownership Scheme restrictions; therefore the plaintiff is the sole beneficial owner and the legal title should be transferred to him within the ordered timeframe.
29 Aug 2014

RE NG TZE CHING

Citation

RE NG TZE CHING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB5883/2006

An order for sale was granted because partition was impracticable, the trustees lawfully held the bankrupt's 1/2 share and sought to realise it for creditors, and the respondent failed to prove the exceptional threshold of 'very great hardship' required to resist sale in the bankruptcy context (court endorsing Re Citro approach).
27 Feb 2014

CHAN CHI CHING AND ANOTHER v. CHEUNG WING HING DAVID

Citation

CHAN CHI CHING AND ANOTHER v. CHEUNG WING HING DAVID
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1364/2012

The defendant's pleaded beneficial ownership does not confer a right to possess the HOS flat during the statutory restriction period; the plaintiffs, as registered owners, are entitled to possession and to order interim payments for the defendant's continued occupation; illegality of any licence does not prevent the plaintiffs recovering possession as their claim does not depend on that licence.
5 Jul 2011

WONG MEI SIN v. NG WAI KIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

WONG MEI SIN v. NG WAI KIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2/2011

Held that a written assent was required (issue 1 against plaintiff); however the Deed of Confirmatory Assent operated as a fresh assent (issue 2 for plaintiff) and, once executed, by estoppel by deed the parties could not deny that legal title had existed for the purpose of validating the 1999 mortgage and subsequent assignment; the Official Receiver need not be a party and plaintiff showed good title (issue 3 for plaintiff).
29 Jan 1999

THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHAU MEI HA t/a RAMCO INTERNATIONAL CO.

Citation

THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHAU MEI HA t/a RAMCO INTERNATIONAL CO.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA787/1992

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the parties' evidence that there was an agreement at the time of purchase that the defendant would have no beneficial interest despite joint registration; that agreement rebutted the presumption of advancement and therefore the defendant held no beneficial interest in the property chargeable to satisfy her judgment debt, so the charging order nisi must be discharged.
4 Nov 1997

YU SIU FUNG v. CHEUNG CHIN WAI

Citation

YU SIU FUNG v. CHEUNG CHIN WAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV135/1997

The Court of Appeal held the judge did not misapply his discretion under s.7 and his substantive decision (award of a lump sum of HKD 500,000 to the wife) was unassailable; because the judge lacked power at that time to order sale, the formal order for sale was set aside and replaced with an order for payment of HKD 500,000 and consequential undertakings; the costs order (no order on appeal; parties' own costs taxed under Legal Aid Regulations) was appropriate in the circumstances.
28 Jun 1993

WONG LAI SUK CHUN v. WONG CHIU MING

Citation

WONG LAI SUK CHUN v. WONG CHIU MING
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3570/1992

Petitioner acquired a beneficial equitable interest in the matrimonial home from the time she began paying mortgage instalments (resulting/constructive trust); that interest ranks after charging orders registered before her interest arose, but a chargee who registered while the property was under the Home Ownership Scheme (with occupation restrictions on the register) is fixed with constructive notice of the likely spouse/family occupier and therefore that chargee (Memorial No.511772) takes subject to the petitioner's equitable interest; accordingly the respondent must transfer his share to t…