Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Possession/eviction

  • 16 Dec 2024

    香港平民屋宇有限公司 對 馮德樂

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 2110
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ39/2024

    The court refused the case‑management stay and refused the expedited/fast‑track trial direction. The balance of convenience and fairness favored continuation of District Court proceedings because the High Court judicial review raises different public‑law issues and a JR result would not necessarily render the District Court private‑law disputes redundant; defendants have private‑law defences that must be pleaded and determined; a blanket rule to stay whenever a JR is pending is inappropriate; expedited trial was refused due to timing, risk of prejudice to defendants' ability to prepare and un…

  • 16 Dec 2024

    香港平民屋宇有限公司 對 趙慶嬋

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 2110
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ2496/2024

    The court refused the case-management stay because most defendants could not demonstrate the JR was their sole or dispositive defence, the JR raised different issues from the regional private-law claims, the balance of convenience favoured continuation, and judicial economy and fairness did not justify suspending proceedings. The court also refused fast-track directions because of substantive uncertainties and risk of prejudice to defendants given the pending JR hearing date and outstanding pleadings; a further case management hearing after the JR was appropriate to reassess timetable.

  • 16 Dec 2024

    香港平民屋宇有限公司 對 梁亞端

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 2110
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ5511/2023

    The court refused the case-management stay and declined to order an expedited trial because the balance of convenience, fairness between parties and efficient use of court resources favoured continuation of District Court proceedings; the JR raise distinct issues and does not automatically render the District Court proceedings moot, and defendants must plead their private-law defences now with the option to apply in the High Court for injunctions or to join the JR if necessary.

  • 22 Aug 2024

    香港平民屋宇有限公司 對 曹綽芝

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 1386
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ5507/2023

    The court refused the plaintiff's application to restore the stayed proceedings because the matters raise substantial and arguable public law issues that risk duplication and injustice if individual non-trial applications proceed; proper case management under Cap 336H requires staying and coordinating the cases (including exploring judicial review, representative test cases, consolidation or disposal on legal points) to secure a just resolution of disputes in accordance with parties' substantive rights, particularly given the vulnerability of many defendants.

  • 24 Dec 2020

    香港特別行政區 訴 占月善

    Citation
    [2020] HKCFI 3134
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA132/2020

    The trial judge's findings that the appellant had been notified of the Land Tribunal's possession order, that her application to stay was dismissed, and that she admitted intentionally damaging the locks were supported by the evidence; medical testimony did not show she lacked understanding, therefore the conviction for criminal damage was properly founded and the appeal fails.

  • 14 Feb 2018

    何玉娟 對 凌雲霞及另一人

    Citation
    [2018] HKDC 157
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ116/2014

    Court preferred first defendant's detailed, coherent evidence over plaintiff's inconsistent evidence; found clear assurances by plaintiff that the property would be transferred, that first defendant relied to her detriment by caring for the mother and incurring expenditures, and that it would be unconscionable to allow plaintiff to resile; accordingly proprietary estoppel established and equitable relief limited to occupation until 30 April 2018 plus reimbursement of proven expenditures (HK$5,664 and RMB338,666).

  • 23 Sept 2013

    FONG WING SENG v. SHAHAAN SAKALIN AND OTHERS

    Citation
    FONG WING SENG v. SHAHAAN SAKALIN AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1390/2013

    At interlocutory stage the court found there was a serious issue to be tried on whether D3 and D4 were validly appointed as directors and whether the possession and mortgage actions were bona fide; on balance of convenience the risk of prejudice to the plaintiff (further charges, dispossession, and potential asset dissipation) outweighed the defendants' interests, so an interim injunction should be granted subject to plaintiff's undertaking as to damages and allowing defendants to continue to defend the Lands Tribunal proceedings.