Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Production of title deeds

Legal area

Court

26 Apr 2023

WENG JENNY WAI YUM v. WENG WAI CHONG RICHARD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1244
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP5/2021

The court, exercising jurisdiction under Order 85 r 2, ordered the sale of the Property at market price as supported by the independent valuations; a dissent by one or more administrators does not permit them to frustrate a sale that reflects market value; the 1st–3rd defendants must make statutory declarations as to possession or custody of the title deeds; costs and sale expenses are to be paid out of the deceased's estate.
12 Apr 2013

KONG KING ONG ALEXANDER v. KAN HEUNG WING AND ANOTHER

Citation

KONG KING ONG ALEXANDER v. KAN HEUNG WING AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3724/2008

Summary judgment was refused because the Vendors' asserted defences raised triable issues of fact and law (whether SPA and SSPAs formed part of the title deeds and whether Vendors had satisfactorily answered reasonable requisitions); consequently the Purchaser had an arguable defence to the counterclaim and an arguable claim in the original action, and unconditional leave to defend was granted so the matters can be tried together.
17 Jan 2011

CHAN SIU HAN v. TONG YUK LAN

Citation

CHAN SIU HAN v. TONG YUK LAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3432/2008

The vendor was obliged to prove good title before completion by producing originals or certified true copies of title documents that relate exclusively to the property; failure to produce the three missing documents or acceptable certified copies before completion amounted to a repudiatory breach entitling the purchaser to rescind and recover the deposit; the Third Party solicitors were negligent in failing to register and timely deliver the documents and must indemnify the vendor for the loss (the refunded deposit).
8 Nov 2000

NG MAN FAI MICHAEL AND ANOTHER v. WORLDPART INDUSTRIAL LTD. AND ANOTHER

Citation

NG MAN FAI MICHAEL AND ANOTHER v. WORLDPART INDUSTRIAL LTD. AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP5708/1998

Applying the practical approach of the authorities, once the premium was paid and the District Lands Officer's consent became effective the risk of government enforcement was fanciful; the vendors proved good title as at receipt of the relevant letters and produced title deeds within a reasonable time; the purchasers did not validly rescind in time; accordingly the plaintiffs' claim for return of deposits fails and the defendants' counterclaim succeeds with damages to be assessed.
23 Nov 1999

IP FOO KEUNG MICHAEL AND ANOTHER v. CHAN PAK KAI

Citation

IP FOO KEUNG MICHAEL AND ANOTHER v. CHAN PAK KAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV273/1999

Section 13 does not exclude the common law rule permitting clear and cogent secondary evidence of lost documents; a purchaser is bound to accept sufficient secondary evidence of the contents of a missing root document or power of attorney, but where the vendor's secondary evidence fails to prove due execution (as in the missing power of attorney in the second case) the purchaser is entitled to rescind; the s.23 presumption does not rescue proof of due execution where the instrument cannot be produced if secondary evidence of due execution is lacking.
13 Jul 1998

MAK YIU HEI KARL and Another v. HO CHI MING

Citation

MAK YIU HEI KARL and Another v. HO CHI MING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1177/1998

The Vendor failed to comply with Clause 6 because the certified true copy certified on 27 August 1997 reflected a Block Crown Lease that was already incomplete and therefore was not a certified copy of a complete and legible Block Crown Lease of D.D. No.106; accordingly good title was not shown and the Purchasers are entitled to rescind the Agreement and recover the deposits and part payment with interest and to a lien on the property.
8 Apr 1997

CHAN CHU HANG ARDEN and Others v. MAN YUN SAU

Citation

CHAN CHU HANG ARDEN and Others v. MAN YUN SAU
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP202/1997

The requisition as to the 1935 mortgage was not sufficiently answered because the vendor's solicitors merely asserted no mortgage deed existed without disclosing the evidential basis; a possessory title is not equivalent to the good title contracted for under Clause 6(a) and s.13 CPO; the ex parte Order against a deceased registered owner does not bind the estate and cannot alone establish possessory title; vendor failed to deduce title in accordance with s.13(1)(a); therefore relief in the originating summons is granted and interest and costs ordered.
8 Apr 1992

GOLD CHECK INVESTMENTS LTD v. STAR INVESTMENT LTD

Citation

GOLD CHECK INVESTMENTS LTD v. STAR INVESTMENT LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP592/1992

Non-production of the Crown Lease (or contract incorporating the Conditions of Sale) went to the root of the title; therefore the purchaser was entitled to object after the contractual requisition period and the vendor failed to show good title in accordance with the Agreement of 31 January 1992; judgment for the purchaser and costs ordered against the vendor.