Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Right of way (easement)

Legal area

Court

21 Dec 2022

MAN HAK KUEN v. FIRST DEVELOP LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1498
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2428/2022

The court found the plaintiff demonstrated a strong prima facie right to the right of way as evidenced by the Assignment and related deeds, there was a real risk the 1st defendant would interfere with that right, and no cogent urgent reason justified permitting the 1st defendant to erect a gate; accordingly an interim injunction was granted restraining interference and erection of obstructions and the 1st defendant's summons was dismissed.
22 Jul 2022

LEE YUK TSAN AND ANOTHER v. SO KWAI CHUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2235
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2581/2018

The Court held it has jurisdiction under Order 25 r 1C to restore a claim only for costs, but the Plaintiffs failed to show good reason for their absence at the pre-trial review and the Court exercised its discretion against restoration; therefore the Summons to restore for costs only is dismissed and costs follow the result.
5 Jul 2017

WONG MALVIN MAN FUNG v. KAN ON TAI as the manager of KAN SAU CHEUNG TSO AND OTHERS

Citation

WONG MALVIN MAN FUNG v. KAN ON TAI as the manager of KAN SAU CHEUNG TSO AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1770/2013

The court found service to the TSW address was not valid because the plaintiff knew the defendants' last known address was Section B; the plaintiff then delayed more than three years in prosecuting the action and enforcing the injunction; additionally the statement of claim failed to plead the basis for the claimed right of way and did not disclose a reasonable cause of action. Having balanced the factors the injunction was set aside and not re-granted, with costs to the 3rd defendants.
29 Aug 2011

RE HO MEI LING

Citation

RE HO MEI LING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL51/2011

Leave refused because the Applicant's central legal premise—that the original Lot's residual development potential remained a collective proprietary interest enforceable against BA's statutory approval—was legally unsustainable: BA's role is to apply statutory plot ratio/site coverage rules to the site depicted in submitted plans subject only to deducting previously used potential (Cinat factor); the Applicant failed to show arguable error of law or fact on inclusion of Section B/pedestrian area as 'street'; extension of time refused for unjustified delay and lack of merit.

Hong Kong Case Law

MAN HAK KUEN v. FIRST DEVELOP LTD AND OTHERS

LEE YUK TSAN AND ANOTHER v. SO KWAI CHUNG AND ANOTHER

WONG MALVIN MAN FUNG v. KAN ON TAI as the manager of KAN SAU CHEUNG TSO AND OTHERS

RE HO MEI LING