Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Title dispute

Legal area

Court

12 Dec 2025

梁秀英對鄧美容及另一人

Citation

[2025] HKDC 2117
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP2229/2025

The court refused to grant summary relief under r.113 because the first defendant raised triable issues (notably a plausible claim of a life occupation and possible proprietary estoppel) and there are unresolved factual disputes about the chain of title and the circumstances of the 2024 sale; accordingly the proper course is to continue the matter as if commenced by writ so the factual and legal disputes can be fully tried.
12 Dec 2025

CAI DEYAN AND ANOTHER v. LAM TING HON

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6239
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1441/2024

Defendant had no arguable defence to purchasers' claim that his refusal to discharge the Third Mortgage and failure to remove it before completion posed a real risk of defeating purchasers' title; accordingly the appeal is allowed, the Master's conditional leave to defend set aside, judgment entered for plaintiffs for return of deposits (HK$2,020,000) and liquidated damages (HK$2,020,000), with interest and costs.
23 Oct 2025

香港平民屋宇有限公司對譚蕙蘭

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1800
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5582/2023

Plaintiff, as registered owner, was entitled to possession upon expiry of the tenancies; defendants were estopped from disputing the landlord’s title; defendants failed to prove promissory or proprietary estoppel, failed to establish an implied perpetual renewal term, and could not show unconscionable dealing sufficient to bar repossession; accordingly plaintiff’s claim for vacant possession succeeds and defendants must deliver vacant possession.
9 Jun 2023

李碧珍對陳湛恩及另一人

Citation

[2023] HKDC 775
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP1531/2021

The first defendant's application for leave to appeal out of time was dismissed because the purported explanation for delay was inconsistent with the chronology and therefore not accepted, and the proposed grounds of appeal (constitutional housing right, ownership by continued occupation and payment, alleged forgery) had no real prospect of success; accordingly the application was refused and costs awarded to the plaintiff.
1 Jun 2023

WING MING GARMENT FACTORY LTD v. SANWA TRADING (H.K.) LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCA 691
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV571/2021

The PSPA referred to the car parking space as marked on the DMC Ground Floor Plan (the Original CPS 2); the Re-designation into the VOID area was not legally effective (no requisite government approval and the VOID areas are common areas as determined in prior final judgments), the Assignment Plan did not reflect the parties' true common intention and therefore rectification to show Original CPS 2 was ordered; Wing Ming's attack was barred by earlier determinations and commercial common sense supported transacting what could lawfully be sold.
30 Sept 2021

陳雲及另一人對振威金屬有限公司及另二人

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2911
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1824/2013

The plaintiffs' claim based on an alleged oral agreement to sell the property in July 2011 failed because the court did not accept the plaintiffs' evidence and, in any event, agreements for sale of land are unenforceable if not in writing under Cap.219 s3; title passed to the defendants by the 1999 assignment supported by contemporaneous cheques and documents, thus plaintiffs must surrender vacant possession and pay arrears, rates, government rent and mesne profits as assessed.
20 Nov 2020

LEUNG SIU WAN IRIS, THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF LEUNG YUN CHEUNG, DECEASED v. TIN KWONG SHIN TONG LTD

Citation

[2020] HKDC 1066
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ48/2018

Where a defendant's pleaded facts establish a substantial case that property may be held for a public charity, the Secretary for Justice must be joined or served with core papers so she may join or intervene; accordingly the trial was adjourned and re-fixed and the Secretary for Justice must be served, with costs thrown away to be in the cause.
8 Jan 2020

CHEUNG PO CHEONG PAUL AND ANOTHER v. WU SIU FAN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKDC 21
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5311/2016

Leave to defend was refused and summary judgment granted because the 1st defendant's only substantive defence sought to litigate a third party's competing title (Chen) in parallel; there was no triable issue between the plaintiffs and the 1st defendant on the pleaded facts and the plaintiffs, as registered co-owners, were entitled to an inquiry and payment of their 1/6 share of occupation rent.
13 Dec 2019

李靜對陳泰谷及另一人

Citation

[2019] HKCA 1382
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV39/2019

The application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused because the proposed appeal was re-litigation of matters already concluded by prior orders and dismissed appeals, lacked any arguable merit or any question of general or public importance under s22(1)(b), and amounted to an abuse of court process; prior restriction orders therefore bar the application and the refusal stands as final absent proper leave.
15 Nov 2018

WONG TAI WAN v. LAM CHI MAY BESSIE

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2665
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP986/2018

The Registrar's 6 August 1976 conveyance executed pursuant to the Supreme Court order in Action No.1655 of 1974, combined with continuous exclusive possession by the plaintiff since 1976 and the provision of substituted service to the defendant who did not appear, means the 1974 private conveyance is overtaken; accordingly declarations that the defendant has no interest and that the 1974 registration be vacated are justified.