15 Jul 2008
AU WAI MING AND ANOTHER v. KAM TZE MING ALFRED AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- AU WAI MING AND ANOTHER v. KAM TZE MING ALFRED AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA738/2007
The discharge was sufficiently executed because the servicer/attorney (AIG) validly executed and attested the release under s.6 Cap.31, and the second attestation constituted proper execution binding the mortgagee; any alleged defect was a matter of conveyance that the vendor could cure and did not defeat good title; the plaintiffs' failure to attend and complete on the due date constituted repudiatory breach entitling the defendants to accept termination and forfeit the deposit.