Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Trespass/mesne profits

Legal area

Court

28 Apr 2026

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF PAK TAT MANSION v. TANG KEE TONG trading as CHILI KING

Citation

[2026] HKLdT 26
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM114/2023

The Tribunal found that Man was the IO’s licensed payor of licence fees and that the respondent occupied by licence/sub‑licence or under arrangements demonstrating willingness to pay; payment and the 2021 tenancy agreement objectively rebutted animus possidendi and therefore respondent failed to prove adverse possession. Equitable defences failed because respondent did not establish the required representation, knowledge by IO, or sufficient detriment and there was no laches. Consequently IO was not time‑barred under Limitation Ordinance and was entitled to relief (vacant possession, mandator…
8 Apr 2025

CHENG PUI WAH 訴 CHENG CHEE HUNG

Citation

[2025] HKCA 325
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP166/2024

The renewed leave application was dismissed because defendant failed to identify any legal error in the trial judge's reasoned findings that plaintiff is the beneficial owner; defendant did not discharge the evidential burden to establish a common intention constructive trust; credibility and factual findings of the trial judge were entitled to deference; the fresh evidence was non-compliant and did not meet Ladd v Marshall; accordingly there was no reasonable prospect of success and no other reason in the interests of justice to grant leave.
2 Jun 2017

LIU KWOK CHUEN v. LIU KWOK CHUN

Citation

LIU KWOK CHUEN v. LIU KWOK CHUN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP1905/2013

Defendant is sole beneficial owner because he provided the purchase money and discharged the mortgage and other outgoings; the plaintiff's evidence of contribution and the alleged oral agreement is rejected as unreliable; plaintiff holds legal title only as trustee on a resulting trust which the plaintiff failed to rebut; plaintiff liable in trespass for period mid-September 2009 to 10 March 2011 and owes mesne profits of HK$184,203 less agreed deductions with interest; conversion proved only for specified items but damages are nominal due to lack of valuation evidence; alleged loans are time…
29 Mar 2016

POON MUI v. CHEONG WAI KIN STANLEY AND ANOTHER

Citation

POON MUI v. CHEONG WAI KIN STANLEY AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2593/2012

Because rent was paid for Ngong Kwai Tau (including Lot 2158) with the last recorded receipt in 1999 the owner's right of action accrued in 1999; neither Cheung Wan nor the 1st defendant proved the requisite animus possidendi or exclusive factual possession of Lot 2158 prior to 14 November 2000, and the 1st defendant's written offer in June 2010 to return the premises further negates intention to exclude the owner. Therefore adverse possession was not established and the plaintiff is entitled to vacant possession, nominal damages and an injunction.
17 Nov 2004

GLORY RISE LTD v. LUO XING JUAN ANGELA

Citation

GLORY RISE LTD v. LUO XING JUAN ANGELA
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA285/2003

The court found on the evidence that the deceased intended to confer a 35% beneficial interest in the Property on Miss Luo and transferred 3,500 shares to her as a gift; Miss Luo relied to her detriment; the Company therefore held the Property on constructive trust for the deceased and Miss Luo in proportions 65:35; as a beneficial co‑owner Miss Luo was not a trespasser and the Company's claims failed; the conduct of the Company after the deceased's death was unfairly prejudicial to Miss Luo's interest and justified winding up the Company on just and equitable grounds, with directions for the…
17 Nov 2004

LUO XING JUAN ANGELA v. THE ESTATE OF HUI SHUI SEE WILLY, DECEASED AND OTHERS

Citation

LUO XING JUAN ANGELA v. THE ESTATE OF HUI SHUI SEE WILLY, DECEASED AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW568/2002

The court found on the evidence that the deceased intended to confer a 35% beneficial interest in the Property on Miss Luo and to transfer 35% of the loans made to the Company to her; the Company therefore held the Property on trust for the deceased and Miss Luo in proportion to their shareholdings (65:35). Consequently Miss Luo was a beneficial co-owner (tenant in common) entitled to non-exclusive possession; the Company's claims for trespass and mesne profits failed; the petition for winding up on just and equitable grounds succeeded as the only realistic means for Miss Luo to realise her a…
6 May 2003

CHU WAI HA v. TSE KI PO AND OTHERS

Citation

CHU WAI HA v. TSE KI PO AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ11039/2001

On the balance of probabilities the court found the plaintiff knowingly consented to substitution of purchaser; the conveyancing clerk (D3) credibly explained the FASP including purchaser identity and was not negligent; the plaintiff repudiated completion and thus D2 was entitled to relief on counterclaim; plaintiff's principal claims for deceit, misrepresentation and negligence against D1, D3 and D4 failed for lack of proof and credibility; D2 liable only for trespass mesne profits from unlawful occupation and entitled to repayment of deposit and decoration costs as awarded.
12 Jan 2001

NON-NO FASHION WHOLESALE LTD. v. CHUNG KAM WING AND ANOTHER

Citation

NON-NO FASHION WHOLESALE LTD. v. CHUNG KAM WING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA20335/1998

On the evidence the Court found the questioned signature on the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was not signed by Chung (forensic evidence showed hesitation, retouching and other indicia of forgery; the defence witness Kwan was not credible and his account inconsistent), therefore the 1996 Tenancy Agreement was null and void; consequently Wholesale Limited's claim was dismissed and the counterclaim for possession, declarations of forgery, injunctions, damages, indemnity and account of profits against Wholesale Limited and Kwan succeeded while the claim against Leung failed for insufficient evidence.