Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Joint tenancy vs tenancy in common

Legal area

Court

5 Dec 2023

TAM LAN CHI LORCHE, suing as an Administratrix of the Estate of TAM KAM FAI FRANCIS, deceased v. CHAN SIU MUI

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1326
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV427/2022

The 2007 Declaration, signed and executed by both parties, constituted a valid written declaration of trust in accordance with s5 Cap 219: each legal owner declared his or her undivided half share on trust for both as equitable joint tenants, thereby creating beneficial joint tenancy and right of survivorship; the earlier 2005 assignment as tenants in common at law did not prevent each owner declaring a trust over his/her share; the Declaration satisfied formalities and was effective; the appeal is dismissed and costs ordered personally against the appellant.
16 Nov 2023

TSANG FLORENCE HON CHU v. CHU SUET CHUNG

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1583
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ261/2016

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff (Florence) and her co‑claimant (Thomas) failed to prove a trust or tenancy in respect of 50% of the Property; the court found the key documents unreliable or likely falsified, Thomas an unreliable and evasive witness, and accepted Chung's evidence of non est factum and that she and Thomas remain joint tenants; accordingly the trust and tenancy claims were dismissed and the impugned documents declared null and void.
6 Mar 2023

RE TONG CHI KIT

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 639
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB4942/2009

On the evidence the Respondent discharged the burden of proving a common intention that she alone held the beneficial interest; the Bankrupt therefore had no beneficial interest and the Trustees' sale application failed on that ground; having nonetheless balanced interests the court also concluded that ordering sale would cause very great hardship and would not be just, so the application was dismissed.
6 Sept 2022

LEUNG CHI CHEONG (the person appointed to represent the estate of LEUNG FAI, deceased) v. LIU CHE WUN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1335
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV487/2021

The Court of Appeal held the 1st defendant failed to establish joint adverse possession from 1980 to 2000 because she could not show single exclusive possession to the exclusion of other family occupiers and could not displace the Deceased's prior possessory title established in the Birkenhead judgment; Fairweather did not permit crafting a possessory title inconsistent with the Birkenhead judgment; accordingly the trial judge's declaratory orders based on joint/tacit tenancy adverse possession were unsupportable, the appeal is allowed and the lower court's orders are set aside with outstandi…
18 Feb 2022

TAM LAN CHI LORCHE, suing as an Administratrix of the Estate of Tam Kam Fai Francis, deceased v. CHAN SIU MUI

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 517
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2084/2017

The 19 July 2007 Declaration, being in writing and signed by both parties, validly created a beneficial joint tenancy under s5 CPO; the obvious typographical omission did not defeat the clear expressed intention and could be corrected; consequentially on the deceased's death the defendant became sole beneficial owner; mistakes in the LA Schedule do not operate to renounce the beneficial interest and are correctable under s24A; IRD and Land Registry remarks are not binding on the court's determination of substantive title.
18 Jan 2022

SZE KA WAI v. CHOY WAI KA

Citation

[2022] HKCA 74
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV121/2021

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal: the trial judge permissibly found on the evidence (including the defendant's admission on 8 January 2018 and the accepted testimony of the plaintiff) that an oral agreement/common intention existed that the defendant would hold his half share on trust for the plaintiff and that the plaintiff had funded the purchase; those findings were open to the judge and properly upheld on appeal.
31 May 2021

黃冠華對歐珈妤

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1555
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA682/2018

The plaintiff failed to rebut the presumption that legal and beneficial title coincide; the parties intended joint beneficial ownership when title was taken as joint tenants, the HK$300,000 was not proved to be a loan, occupation rent and mortgage payments offset each other, and therefore the property must be sold with net proceeds split equally after liabilities and costs.
28 Oct 2019

CHANG KING TO v. CHANG KING HIM CLARENCE AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2597
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1574/2017

On the evidence the court found KT a bare trustee with no beneficial interest; the 2nd Notice of Severance validly severed the legal joint tenancy; Clarence established proprietary estoppel (representations, reliance, detriment) entitling him to remain during Madam Wong's lifetime; accordingly KT's claims for declarations, possession and mesne profits fail.
2 Jun 2017

LIU KWOK CHUEN v. LIU KWOK CHUN

Citation

LIU KWOK CHUEN v. LIU KWOK CHUN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP1905/2013

Defendant is sole beneficial owner because he provided the purchase money and discharged the mortgage and other outgoings; the plaintiff's evidence of contribution and the alleged oral agreement is rejected as unreliable; plaintiff holds legal title only as trustee on a resulting trust which the plaintiff failed to rebut; plaintiff liable in trespass for period mid-September 2009 to 10 March 2011 and owes mesne profits of HK$184,203 less agreed deductions with interest; conversion proved only for specified items but damages are nominal due to lack of valuation evidence; alleged loans are time…
27 Jun 2016

RE TSANG YIN HONG

Citation

RE TSANG YIN HONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB4387/2007

The court found on the evidence (payments traced to Madam Yiu and consistent admissions by Mr Tsang) that Madam Yiu alone paid for the purchase and discharged the onus to show a contrary intention to equal beneficial ownership; consequently Mr Tsang has no beneficial interest and the Trustees' application for sale is dismissed; alternatively, even if he had a beneficial share, the court would refuse sale because sale would cause very great hardship to Madam Yiu.