Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Executor duties

Legal area

Court

14 May 2025

KAN YUK SUM v. KAN YUK SHING (in his personal capacity and as the executor of the estate of Tam Lee Yau)

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1999
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP268/2023

Leave to discontinue granted; because the defendant defaulted in discharging executor duties by delaying production of supporting documents, the defendant must pay 80% of the costs of these proceedings personally to the plaintiff (party and party basis) to be summarily assessed, while costs incurred by the defendant in preparing and providing the supporting documents are payable by the estate to the defendant on trustee basis and summarily assessed; plaintiff's entitlement reduced to 80% because irrelevant partnership issues unnecessarily increased costs.
4 Mar 2025

LIU WAI YAN ANGELA v. LIU MEI YUK and LIU MUN YUK, the co-executrices named in the Will of LIU CHI MAN, deceased

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 945
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP7/2023

On the admitted facts and sworn evidence of the solicitor and psychiatrist, the defendants discharged the persuasive burden to show due execution, testamentary capacity and knowledge and approval; the plaintiff failed to establish any credible triable issue of lack of knowledge/approval or of undue influence; summary judgment was therefore appropriate and the will was pronounced in solemn form; writ and statement of claim were struck out and costs awarded to defendants.
27 Jan 2025

OFFICIAL ADMINISTRATOR, in his capacity as the administrator of the estate of AIDA HENRIETTE VINE nee AGABEG v. MA WAH YAN, in his capacity as the co-executor of the estate of the late VINE PETER ALAN LEE, and as the executor of the estate of the late AGABEG GODFREY AVRYL AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 454
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1641/2024

The 1st defendant was ordered to produce a full inventory and account with supporting documents because section 56 PAO and Order 85 RHC impose a statutory duty on personal representatives to exhibit accounts on lawful demand, the 1st defendant had repeatedly failed to respond over many years, and the Official Administrator requires the accounts to complete administration of the deceased's estate.
29 Oct 2024

CHING CHUNG YIN SECINA in her capacity as the executrix of the estate of CHING CHI SAU, deceased v. CHING CHUNG KAM ANDREW in his capacity as the executor of the estate of CHING CHI SAU, deceased

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1738
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2920/2023

Appeal allowed in part: the court held that the interest loss claim is not an abuse of process and restored those parts of the Statement of Claim concerning interest loss because prior Order 85 proceedings and the High Court declaration did not preclude a separate equitable compensation claim arising before and after the declaration; however the Benevolent Fund-related pleas were struck out as barred by issue estoppel because the substantive questions relating to the Benevolent Fund had been fully litigated and determined by Wilson Chan J in HCMP 2339/2020. Limited fresh evidence (specified p…
15 Feb 2024

CHING CHUNG YIN SECINA v. CHING CHUNG KAM ANDREW IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF CHING CHI SAU, DECEASED

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 527
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1643/2021

The Order Absolute was properly made because Wilson Chan J’s earlier order had earmarked HK$1,638,000 as beneficially held for Secina so the bank held the Amount on her behalf and an enforceable equitable charge could be imposed to secure the undisputed judgment Sum; the trust character of the funds and any potential circularity did not prevent enforcement; allegations of inequitable conduct by Andrew did not, in light of his assurance to the court to release the Amount minus the Sum within 14 days, justify setting aside the Order Absolute; accordingly the appeal was dismissed.
29 Nov 2022

ZQA AND OTHERS v. SCC (sued as Executor and Beneficiary of the Estate of the Deceased) AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKFC 254
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP63/2017

Court found applicants were maintained by the deceased and that significant post‑will payments to Madam Z were testamentary in purpose, but Madam Z had substantial disclosed and undisclosed resources, had not been credible and should not receive provision from the estate; children were entitled to reasonable maintenance paid from the estate: lump sums HKD1,260,000 (Daughter One) and HKD1,980,000 (Daughter Two) to be paid into court and invested with monthly payments of HKD15,000 each until majority. Net estate for purposes of the claim was ascertained at HKD12,897,260 (after adjustments). Cos…
18 Oct 2022

鄭宗妍對鄭宗建

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1548
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV434/2021

The appeal fails because the appellant's claims were brought in her personal capacity (not as representative of the estate) and therefore provided no legal basis for withholding or deducting the respondent's 20% testamentary share; the original judge correctly refused the interlocutory relief and correctly applied the law on admissibility of fresh evidence (admitting some documents and refusing others).
25 Aug 2022

CHAN KUI HAI, THE SOLE EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF CHAN SHING CHEUNG, DECEASED v. CHAN KUI KEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2642
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA49/2018

Leave granted because the updated estate accounts and bank statements relate to matters in issue — in particular allegations of misappropriation and failure to account by the executor — and may be material to the Plaintiff's defence and to the court's exercise of discretion on ordering accounts; relevance can be tested at trial.
22 Mar 2022

HO YAT WAH v. CHUNG HANG HIM (鍾衡謙), the Sole Executor named in the Will of Madam CHAN YUK MUI, deceased

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 791
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA731/2014

The claimant failed to prove the existence of an oral trust agreement or any express common intention; the conduct and contemporaneous documentary and bank evidence did not support that the deceased held the assets as trustee for the plaintiff; many transfers from plaintiff were more consistent with gifts, general support, or repayments under an overdraft/loan facility and the deceased had independent financial resources; consequently neither a common intention constructive trust nor a resulting trust arose; the court awarded the plaintiff reimbursement for medical expenses he proved and foun…
23 Apr 2021

HO SUEN CHANG v. HO HIN CHEUNG

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1132
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1670/2015

The court struck out parts of the RDCCC: (a) claims for accounts in respect of FWS and 430A rents and sale proceeds and all account claims arising before 9 July 2009 because the plaintiff’s case conceded concurrent legal and equitable rights so the six year limitation applied and those causes of action fell outside the limitation period; (b) the Account Counterclaim was struck out for lack of locus insofar as it sought the Executor to sue himself; and (c) allegations relating to Lap Kee Property were struck out as conceded. The Adjusted Relevant Date is 9.7.2009 and costs awarded to Defendant…