Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Laches and acquiescence

Legal area

Court

12 Feb 2025

LAU TUNG KUEN, personal representative of the estate of TANG MING TAI, deceased v. LAU TUNG HOI KENT

Citation

[2025] HKDC 219
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1452/2021

On the facts the court preferred the Plaintiff's account: the family gathering resulted in an agreement to set aside estate monies to acquire the Two Properties for the Six Beneficiaries and title held in P and D's names was to be held on trust for the beneficiaries; the HK$200,000 advanced to D was a loan as admitted by D in contemporaneous WhatsApp messages which constituted written acknowledgements under the Limitation Ordinance; equitable defences of laches and acquiescence did not bar relief; accordingly D must account for income received from the Two Properties and the loan claim is not…
13 Sept 2024

KU MING FONG KATHERINE AND OTHERS v. CHU CHIA CHIN CHARLES

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2309
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1757/2018

The court found the alleged 1995 conversation did not occur and accepted evidence that the defendant sold the Lully shares in 1992 and informed the 4th plaintiff; consequently there was no trust (lack of subject‑matter) and, alternatively, the claim was barred by laches; plaintiff claims were dismissed and costs awarded to the defendant.
20 Dec 2023

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF GOLDEN INDUSTRIAL BUILDING v. YEE LIM INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3314
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1126/2021

The DMC's definition of Common Areas, read in context and with reference to the Layout and BD Plans and the Government Grant, includes the First Floor loading/unloading bays; Special Conditions require provision of such spaces for common use so private ownership would defeat their purpose; Schedule 2's absence of a management fee entry for loading/unloading bays supports their common status; estoppel/acquiescence and laches defenses failed on the evidence; accordingly the Subject Loading/Unloading Bays are common parts and the registered owner must deliver up vacant possession; statutory and…
29 Nov 2023

CHAN SUK YING (aka CHAN SHOCK YING) v. LEE WAI LING CELINE the personal representatives of THE ESTATE OF PETER LI CHAK MING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3085
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA568/2021

The Draft Substituted Statement of Claim discloses an arguable cause of action: on the pleaded facts a common intention constructive trust over the Garments Factory assets is not incapable of being established and the tracing allegation is not plainly and obviously unsustainable; laches is not a bar at this stage given the statutory limitation framework and the plaintiff’s pleaded reliance on Peter and lack of knowledge; accordingly the strike-out order cannot stand and the plaintiff is permitted to apply to amend the SOC within 14 days; the application to set aside the ex parte renewal of th…
25 Jun 2021

WONG SHIU LUEN AND ANOTHER v. WONG YING WAI AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1835
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA913/2013

The court accepted documentary and credible witness evidence that (1) the 1996 allotment was validly approved with consent and is confirmed; (2) the 2001 transfers were intentionally effected by WC as part of a 'Scheme', WC had capacity when executing the transfer documents and both fellow directors/shareholders (WSL and WWC) knew of and agreed to the transfers, so the transfers are valid; (3) the sums claimed by plaintiffs in the Loans Action originated from WYW’s Macau Account and were passed via WWC at WYW’s instruction, therefore plaintiffs’ loan claims fail except that WWC’s estate must…
25 Jun 2021

LEE CHI HANG AND OTHERS v. WELL DONE GARMENT FACTORY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1835
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA465/2013

On the evidence (contemporaneous documents, admissions in probate administration, credible witnesses and neutral account clerk), the 1996 allotment was valid by consent at the 1996 EGM; WC had capacity and the 2001 transfers were valid and formed part of an intentional scheme transferring assets (including Macau account funds) to WYW with knowledge or assent of WSL and WWC; the moneys allegedly loaned by WWC and WSL were in fact funded from WYW’s Macau account, so plaintiffs’ loan claims fail, save that the estate must account for an unexplained balance of HK$2,569,000; MPF overpayment of HK$…
25 Jun 2021

LEE CHI HANG AND OTHERS v. WELL DONE GARMENT FACTORY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1835
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA227/2012

Court found on the balance of credible contemporaneous evidence that (1) the 1996 allotment was valid with consent of WSL and WWC; (2) the 2001 share transfers were valid because WC had capacity and both WSL and WWC knew of and agreed to the transfers as part of WC's Scheme to transfer assets to WYW; (3) the sums claimed as loans by plaintiffs originated from WYW's Macau account and were entrusted to WWC to apply, therefore plaintiffs' loan claims fail but WWC's estate must account for an unaccounted balance (HK$2,569,000); (4) Well Done is entitled to repayment of the MPF overpayment; (5) Ne…
31 Oct 2017

CHU TSAN LEUNG v. LEUNG MEE LING AMY AND OTHERS

Citation

CHU TSAN LEUNG v. LEUNG MEE LING AMY AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP774/2016

The consent order was valid and not set aside: the Trustees failed to establish the First Requirement (trust and confidence/ascendancy) and the Second Requirement (manifest disadvantage) for presumed undue influence; upon pronouncement of the decree absolute the plaintiff became sole beneficial owner and the bankrupt had ceased to have any beneficial interest prior to bankruptcy so the property did not form part of the bankruptcy estate; Trustees' counterclaim dismissed.
21 Aug 2017

CHENG HUNG KIT v. TSOI CHIK SANG LAWRENCE AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHENG HUNG KIT v. TSOI CHIK SANG LAWRENCE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2742/2016

The estoppel plea was struck out because the alleged 2007 representations were inherently improbable and unsupported by the unsigned document (with no credible explanation), the alleged promise was at best suspensory and could not found an estoppel, laches was inapplicable where statutory limitation governs enforcement, and the writ constituted an abuse of process by seeking relief that should have been raised in existing enforcement proceedings; accordingly the statement of claim was struck out and the action dismissed with costs to the applicant.
21 Aug 2017

CHENG HUNG KIT v. TSOI CHIK SANG LAWRENCE

Citation

CHENG HUNG KIT v. TSOI CHIK SANG LAWRENCE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSD32/2016

The court struck out the Statement of Claim because the central estoppel plea was found to be incontrovertibly false or a tissue of improbabilities (the alleged Document was unsigned and unexplained, and the 2007 Representations lacked any solid evidential basis), laches/acquiescence was legally unavailable as a defence to enforcement while the statutory limitation period had yet to expire, and the action constituted an abuse of process by seeking relief that should have been pursued in the enforcement proceedings; accordingly the SOC was struck out and the action dismissed with costs to the…