Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Removal of administrators pendente lite

Legal area

Court

16 Mar 2005

WANG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG

Citation

WANG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV275/2004

Leave to appeal was refused because the purportedly general questions were not central to the Court of Appeal's decision, which turned on practical, case‑specific circumstances — principally that there was no realistic prospect of resolving the removal application before determination of the probate proceedings and intervening stays had addressed the practical risk — and because pursuing the motion would be an unjustified waste of costs and resources; indemnity costs were ordered against the applicant.
21 Jan 2005

WANG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG

Citation

WANG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV275/2004

Adjournment of the removal application was proper because by the time a factually complex removal hearing and any consequent appeals could be finally determined the administrators' appointment would in all likelihood have terminated on final determination of the probate lis, rendering the remedy otiose; the paramount consideration under s33(3) is the interests of the estate and its beneficiaries, and indemnity costs were not justified absent special features so the indemnity costs order was reduced to party-and-party basis.
31 Dec 2003

WONG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG

Citation

WONG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP8/1999

The court held that the recusal application fails: a removal application under s33 PAO is part of estate administration and does not automatically disqualify the administration judge; the alleged embarrassment was irrelevant because the propriety and scope of prior orders are not determinative of the administrators' fitness where actions fall within court sanction and there is no allegation of misrepresentation or non-disclosure; and the defendant failed to show a real possibility of bias from confidential ex parte materials, so recusal was not required.

Hong Kong Case Law

WANG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG

WANG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG

WONG DIN SHIN v. NINA KUNG