Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Codicil

Legal area

Court

24 Feb 2023

AU KIN KONG KINNY v. AU PUI YUE CANDY (IN HER PERSONAL CAPACITY AS WELL AS IN HER CAPACITY AS THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF AU KWOK TUNG, DECEASED) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 540
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP9/2020

The court refused to strike out pleaded administration matters in the probate actions because (i) both jurisdictions are vested in the Court of First Instance and the exercise of distinct jurisdictions can be managed by case management, (ii) the matters are not plain or obvious candidates for strike out given substantial overlapping issues and prior procedural steps, and (iii) where probate and administration matters are intertwined the court may transfer/convert the proceedings rather than dismiss parts for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly the summonses to strike out were dismissed and case…
24 Feb 2023

AU KIN KONG KINNY v. AU PUI YUE CANDY (IN HER PERSONAL CAPACITY AS WELL AS IN HER CAPACITY AS THE ADMINISTRATRIX DE BONIS NON OF THE ESTATE OF LEUNG YEE MEE) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 540
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP8/2020

The court held that although administration matters pleaded in a probate action are ordinarily outside the probate jurisdiction, both jurisdictions are vested in the Court of First Instance and the court may exercise case management powers to transfer or convert proceedings rather than striking out; on the facts the impugned administration paragraphs should not be struck out, HCAP 8 is to be transferred to the HCA List as an administration action, HCAP 9 is to be split with probate issues (codicil and removal of executrix insofar as probate) to be tried first and the administration issues to…
17 Dec 2003

RE LEUNG WAI JING

Citation

RE LEUNG WAI JING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAG199/2002

Clause 3 of Document A and Documents B/C effected immediate transfers in praesenti and therefore created inter vivos trusts (not testamentary dispositions) and could be severed from the will; Documents B and C are not codicils or valid wills; the Church is not entitled to take a grant of probate as executor because its Memorandum and Articles do not expressly empower it to take a grant; the Church is nevertheless a trustee of the identified sums and must administer them accordingly.
6 Nov 1995

HO HIP LIK and Another v. KWAN MAN HO and Others

Citation

HO HIP LIK and Another v. KWAN MAN HO and Others
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP6/1986

Judge found plaintiffs guilty of inordinate and inexcusable delay from mid-1992 but concluded defendants failed to prove that the delay created a substantial risk of an unfair trial or serious prejudice; exercising discretion, court refused to strike out the action.

Hong Kong Case Law

AU KIN KONG KINNY v. AU PUI YUE CANDY (IN HER PERSONAL CAPACITY AS WELL AS IN HER CAPACITY AS THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF AU KWOK TUNG, DECEASED) AND ANOTHER

AU KIN KONG KINNY v. AU PUI YUE CANDY (IN HER PERSONAL CAPACITY AS WELL AS IN HER CAPACITY AS THE ADMINISTRATRIX DE BONIS NON OF THE ESTATE OF LEUNG YEE MEE) AND ANOTHER

RE LEUNG WAI JING

HO HIP LIK and Another v. KWAN MAN HO and Others