30 Oct 1995
TAM MO YIN and Another v. ATTORNEY GENERAL and Others
- Citation
- TAM MO YIN and Another v. ATTORNEY GENERAL and Others
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMP1868/1994
The auction area figure was not a certainty because the original plan was lost and the DD Control Sheet was casually plotted; extrinsic evidence (aerial photographs, construction of bunds/sluice gates and continuous occupation) establishes the intended boundaries so plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration of paper title according to the area they and predecessors occupied; however the claim to possessory title fails because Cap.152 produced a new Crown lease from 1 July 1973 which interrupted the running of time and prevents aggregation of adverse possession to reach 60 years.