Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Imperfect gift

  • 4 Mar 2026

    香浪生 對 王美園

    Citation
    [2026] HKDC 331
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ2842/2023

    Court accepted plaintiff's evidence and contemporaneous documents, found defendant failed to prove proprietary estoppel or any beneficial interest in the Lai Wah Court property (license revoked and 27/02/2023 letter admissions decisive); found defendant acted without authority in leasing Fuk Wah Street premises and must account for profits; found HK$950,000 was obtained by undue influence (and supported by admissions in recordings) and must be repaid with interest; awarded costs to plaintiff (interim).

  • 23 Sept 2014

    LAW MAN WAI v. KWAN SAU SIM

    Citation
    LAW MAN WAI v. KWAN SAU SIM
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV249/2013

    The purported express trust over the Fund failed for uncertainty of subject matter and thus was not a valid trust; however, on the facts found by the trial judge the parties had proceeded throughout on the common assumption that 6th Aunt’s transfers constituted a gift to Wai and Kam and Wai is estopped by convention from denying that the funds (including the HK$8.3m used to purchase two properties) were in the nature of a gift to Kam, so the appellant is precluded from asserting beneficial entitlement to those properties.

  • 25 Nov 1996

    ADRIENNE MARSH LEFKOWITZ v. GORDON DAVID OLDHAM and Others

    Citation
    ADRIENNE MARSH LEFKOWITZ v. GORDON DAVID OLDHAM and Others
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA4573/1993

    The plaintiff failed to establish either that Mr Marsh declared himself trustee of the accounts for her or that Mr Li accepted a trust in her favour; annotations in account statements, the delivery of a cheque, letters and other documents were insufficient to show an intention and effective disposition that divested Mr Marsh of beneficial ownership; withdrawals and subsequent conduct were inconsistent with a trust being created; therefore the plaintiff's proprietary claims fail and the accounts remained beneficially Mr Marsh's and passed to the defendants as administrators/executor.