Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Caveat

Legal area

Court

3 Dec 2024

陳麗琴對陳麗華

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2512
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCA2993/2022

The court found the caveator failed to demonstrate any contrary interest in the deceased's estate; her allegations were unparticularised, unsupported and constituted an abuse of process given delay and refusal to commence proper probate proceedings; therefore the Registrar's order removing the caveat was justified, the appeal was dismissed, the refusal to grant a stay was upheld, and costs were ordered against the caveator.
27 Feb 2024

REN MICKY v. FUNG KUNG KUEN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCA 164
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP320/2023

The application for leave to appeal out of time was dismissed because the defendants' delay was substantial and inexcusable, their status as laymen did not excuse delay, and their intended appeal lacked a real prospect of success; the trial judge's costs order up to 28 October 2020 was within discretion and not shown to be wrong in principle or plainly wrong.
1 Feb 2023

CHAN HUNG KIT v. TUNG LAI SHAN

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 317
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCA4712/2020

The court permitted the late affirmation because the forensic report addressed the central factual issue—authorship of the Transfer Documents—which is critical to the Caveator's allegation; in the interests of justice the court granted leave only on condition of an adjournment and payment of costs, and allowed PW to adduce expert evidence in reply, balancing the lack of explanation for lateness against the high value of the estate and the seriousness of the forgery allegation.
16 Jun 2022

RE LAU HOI TO

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1703
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCA3230/2020

The caveator, a creditor claiming an unproven monetary debt, did not demonstrate a contrary interest in the estate or a legitimate interest in the relief under section 36 PAO; she had not pursued a section 36 application or a probate action despite time and information to do so; the outstanding loan was a disputed unsecured claim and not shown to be a material non-disclosure that justified retention of the caveat; accordingly the caveat and appearance were an abuse of process and properly struck out and the Master's order was affirmed.
17 Dec 2020

CHEN CHIU LAI FU MARY EVELYN alias CHEN CHIU LAI FU EVELYN MARY v. CHIU TAI CHOI DANNY alias DANIEL CHIU AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 3140
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1355/2020

D1 was removed because he possessed the Will naming him executor yet failed for three years to apply for probate or to administer the estate, failed to produce the Will voluntarily, failed to respond to processes and did not file an acknowledgement of service; P's proposed replacement is fit and proper and appointment of a professional accountant is appropriate given the value of the estate.
4 Dec 2019

TIMOTHY HERMAN ALBERTS v. GERARDUS EVERARDUS LOMAN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2900
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP35/2015

Court found the professionally prepared 2008 will and 2012 codicil had been revoked by the testator's crossing out and confirmatory signatures; the subsequent homemade scripts (including the Alleged 2014 Script) were created in circumstances that were suspicious, contained material errors and inconsistencies and did not satisfy s.5(1) nor could they be admitted under s.5(2); therefore there was no valid will and the estate falls to intestacy with the plaintiff, as sole lawful child, entitled to letters of administration.
31 Jan 2018

葉崇堅及另一人對葉永清

Citation

[2018] HKCA 46
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV145/2017

The application for security for costs was refused because the applicant did not establish that the appeal was clearly frivolous or an abuse such that security should be ordered; the respondent's assets (a half-share in a property forming part of the deceased's estate) were not shown to be inaccessible or insufficient to satisfy costs so as to constitute special circumstances under Order 59 r10(5); and the applicants had not met the higher threshold equivalent to a strike-out standard for the appeal.
3 Jan 2018

FOK PO NAM v. HSBC TRUSTEE (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCA3844/2017

Po Nam, on his own evidence, had no interest in the deceased's estate and therefore lacked locus standi to enter and maintain the caveat or to pursue the summons for directions; the court struck out his appearance and the caveat and dismissed the summons because the relief sought concerned administration matters not proper to determine in these probate proceedings.
15 Dec 2017

LAM CHUNG WAI v. LAM HI WAY

Citation

LAM CHUNG WAI v. LAM HI WAY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP29/2015

The judge found, on the balance of the evidence, that the defendant knowingly made a false statutory declaration and gave untruthful evidence about his dealings with the safe deposit boxes; as a result the defendant was not a fit and proper person to act as executor and must be removed under s.33 of the Probate and Administration Ordinance; the will was duly executed and is to be admitted to probate in solemn form and granted to the plaintiff as sole executor.
31 Aug 2017

黃林豐對黃紅艷

Citation

黃林豐對黃紅艷
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCA1148/2017

Applicant was appointed sole executor because the proven matters showed she was fit and preferable: stable finances, closer relationship with the deceased, no conflict of interest (she waived certain proprietary claims), estate was straightforward so professional appointment was unnecessary, and opposing allegations were uncorroborated or inherently doubtful; competing applications were therefore refused.