Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Removal of executors

Legal area

Court

4 Dec 2024

WONG KA WAI v. WONG KA YIN RITA (one of the Executors of the estate of WONG LUK KAN, deceased) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3659
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1094/2021

Plaintiff's removal application and alternative s56 claim fail because core allegations rest on disputed facts (existence of debts and ownership of funds in the DBS account) that cannot be resolved on the affidavits without cross-examination; defendants provided accounts and the administration is not stalled by executor misconduct; removal under s33(3) is not necessary for due and proper administration and ordering affirmation under s56 is premature until the factual disputes are resolved.
6 Feb 2024

LAU WAI LING WINNIE v. LAU YU MING DAVID AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 354
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAP2/2023

The court removed the three executors under PAO s.33(3) because they failed to render accounts, were dilatory in administration, two took or failed to account for estate assets (jewellery and rental income), conflicts and breakdown of relations made proper administration impossible, and the applicant was a suitable replacement administrator; consequential orders including accounts, delivery up, vesting and costs were granted.
3 Aug 2023

SO CHO YEE AND ANOTHER v. KONG CHI HOW JOHNSON alias JOHNSON KONG, the administrator and trustee of the estate of SO KA WING, deceased

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2000
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP500/2023

Defendant unjustifiably withheld documents in breach of his duties as administrator; plaintiffs obtained the substantive relief and are entitled to costs to be paid personally by the defendant; those costs are to be summarily assessed on party and party basis with certificate for counsel and the defendant shall not be indemnified for those costs out of the respective estates.
3 Aug 2023

SO CHO YEE AND ANOTHER v. KONG CHI HOW JOHNSON alias JOHNSON KONG, the administrator and trustee of the estate of LEE SAU YING, deceased

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2000
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP499/2023

Defendant received the documents prior to the originating summons but unjustifiably withheld disclosure while purporting to investigate ownership disputes; as administrator he should have adopted a neutral position and referred disputes to the court or sought legal advice; accordingly the applicants obtained the substantive relief and are entitled to costs which the defendant must pay personally and may not recover from the estates; costs to be summarily assessed with certificate for counsel.
5 Aug 2022

WONG CHEONG MING v. WONG CHAK MING

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2425
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2189/2020

The Consent Order must be construed in its factual context to effect the parties' common intention to replace the executors with an IPA; a term is to be implied that both parties must take reasonable steps, including accepting the IPA's service terms unless those terms are unreasonable, to enable the IPA's formal appointment; the defendant's continued refusal was unreasonable and the court will order performance and award costs to the plaintiff.
23 Jul 2019

YUNG IVAN CAESAR AND OTHERS v. YUNG SIU CHEE MARGARET AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1767
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1568/2017

The court refused the application for additional remuneration to Fionne Choy because the Will had already fixed remuneration and the executors failed to discharge the onus of showing that the fixed amount was inadequate or that special circumstances existed; similarly, costs of the PRC proceedings could not be allowed out of the estate because the executors failed to produce pre-litigation advice and full disclosure necessary to show the litigation was reasonably and properly brought, and the court would not have authorised those proceedings on the material before it.
23 Jul 2019

YUNG SIU CHEE MARGARET AND OTHERS v. CHOY CHING WA FIONNE AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1767
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1682/2016

The court held that substantial weight must be given to the testator's express provision for remuneration in the will; the executrices failed to discharge the onus of showing the will's fixed remuneration was inadequate or that special circumstances existed. Consequently the court would not exercise its discretion to grant additional remuneration to Fionne Choy beyond the amount provided in the will. Further, because the executrices did not produce pre-litigation advice or disclose strengths and weaknesses, the court would not have authorized the PRC proceedings and would not allow their cost…
22 Mar 2019

SAM SIEN SAN ALBERT v. SAM MO YEE

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 764
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1203/2016

On the balance of probabilities the court found the father intended to and completed a gift of the Taiwan Company dividends to the defendant, making her the beneficial owner of HK$1,172,158; on available evidence the court found the common intention as to the HSBC joint accounts was that the survivor takes the balance and declared the plaintiff beneficial owner of those balances on the mother's death; the alleged mismanagement did not justify removal of the defendant as executrix; limited repayments/declarations were ordered (repayment of specified withdrawals and entitlements).
28 Dec 2009

LEE CHARLES v. LEE YAN CHUN AND OTHERS

Citation

LEE CHARLES v. LEE YAN CHUN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1709/2007

The Deed of 8 June 2004 was valid and binding on the executors once communicated; the 1st to 3rd executors failed to render a full and proper account and unjustifiably delayed distribution of the Canadian Accounts; these failures justified removal under s33 PAO and warranted orders for inventory, account, distribution pursuant to the Deed and appointment of a professional accountant to replace them.
22 Nov 2001

ANNABELL KIN YEE LEE AND OTHERS v. LEE WING KIM (MAY LEE)

Citation

ANNABELL KIN YEE LEE AND OTHERS v. LEE WING KIM (MAY LEE)
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA9522/1997

The proposed expert report was excluded because it did not identify any recognised body of expertise or established professional standards, addressed matters that are within the court's own knowledge, and amounted to advocacy and legal submissions rather than independent expert opinion; therefore the report was not admissible or helpful and leave to adduce it was refused.