Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Nemo dat quod non habet

Legal area

Court

17 Sept 2025

RE TO KWAN CHAK trading as Legend Construction Engineering Company

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4189
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB6709/2024

There was a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds that Linker made representations that CNQC remained liable and that those representations induced the 1st and 3rd underlying agreements and cheques; on that basis the petition must be dismissed. The court found no bona fide dispute on the collection of materials, ownership of the materials, or on the effect of the waivers to defeat liability, but those findings did not cure the decisive dispute on representations.
18 Jul 2025

YIM TIN FOOK, since deceased (YIM LOK MAN WINNE, appointed by Order dated 10 May 2024 to represent the Estate of YIM TIN FOOK, deceased) AND ANOTHER v. YU CHOR LAI, KONG WAI HUNG and SOU KA LUN trading as WANG CHEUNG INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 675
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV5/2020

The Court applied the Milmo rule: the 1983 lease operated as an assignment of the Government Lease to D2; the NTLEO extended the term of that lease without changing ownership and thus extended D2's term; however, because the 1983 lease was registrable but unregistered, section 3(2) LRO rendered it null and void as against subsequent bona fide purchasers for value (the Registered Owners), who therefore took good title. Accordingly the judge’s determinations on all three questions were upheld and the appeals dismissed.
23 Nov 2020

RE ASIA VIEW ENTERPRISES LTD

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2812
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW189/2020

The company demonstrated a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds because clause 10 was more plausibly a timing provision rather than displacing the CIF default that payment arises on tender of shipping documents; under nemo dat the petitioner only acquired Phoenix's rights which had not yet arisen if documents were not delivered; the company's email reply did not constitute a clear and unequivocal representation amounting to estoppel; accordingly the petition was averted and struck out.
3 Jul 2002

CHAN KWOK KI v. PANG SIU MING

Citation

CHAN KWOK KI v. PANG SIU MING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2246/1995

The Second Assignments were invalid because the assignors had no title by reason of the prior registered First Assignment (nemo dat); the Registrar had wrongly accepted and entered the Second Assignments on the Register; on balance of public interest and preserving the purity of the Register the court exercised its discretion under s.48(1) to order rectification (expunge the Second Assignments). Separately, on the evidence the defendant caused counterfeit Wood Lock Oil to be manufactured and labelled with Wan Li identifiers at Jizhu after ZHYKL ceased production and was therefore liable for p…
6 Jul 1983

CHEUK CHAU CO LTD v. CHAU KWAN NAM AND OTHERS

Citation

CHEUK CHAU CO LTD v. CHAU KWAN NAM AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP274/1982

Although defendants had acquired title by adverse possession against the original lessee/vendor, the plaintiff (having succeeded to the lessee's position) surrendered the lease and obtained a re-grant which terminated the defendants' rights of occupation; accordingly the plaintiff was entitled to possession.
22 Jun 1983

THE QUEEN v. TAI SHING JEWELLERY CO AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. TAI SHING JEWELLERY CO AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC278/1982

Section 24(1) of the Sale of Goods Ordinance protects members of the public who purchase goods in the ordinary course from a shop or market; it does not extend to protect a shopkeeper who buys goods in his own shop from a seller who lacks title. Therefore the shopkeeper did not acquire good title and the application to retain the coins fails.
12 Nov 1971

MAK LAU SUI-KAN v. LAI MAN-YAU AND ANOTHER

Citation

MAK LAU SUI-KAN v. LAI MAN-YAU AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2038/1971

On balance of probabilities the Plaintiff was sole beneficial owner based on documentary evidence of payment and registration; therefore the deceased could not have conveyed a tenancy to the 2nd Defendant and the 1st Defendant's alleged expenditure did not create a licence coupled with an interest because there was no inducement by the owner to spend; accordingly interlocutory possession and prohibitory relief were justified to restore the status quo, subject to conditions.

Hong Kong Case Law

RE TO KWAN CHAK trading as Legend Construction Engineering Company

YIM TIN FOOK, since deceased (YIM LOK MAN WINNE, appointed by Order dated 10 May 2024 to represent the Estate of YIM TIN FOOK, deceased) AND ANOTHER v. YU CHOR LAI, KONG WAI HUNG and SOU KA LUN trading as WANG CHEUNG INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO AND ANOTHER

RE ASIA VIEW ENTERPRISES LTD

CHAN KWOK KI v. PANG SIU MING

CHEUK CHAU CO LTD v. CHAU KWAN NAM AND OTHERS

THE QUEEN v. TAI SHING JEWELLERY CO AND ANOTHER

MAK LAU SUI-KAN v. LAI MAN-YAU AND ANOTHER