Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Vesting orders

Legal area

Court

9 Mar 2026

RE the Joint and Several Administrators of the Estate of KUNG NINA

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1304
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1015/2025

Applying ss.45 and 52 of the Trustee Ordinance and authorities, the judge was satisfied on the evidence that Donald held the Subject Assets on trust for the Estate of Kung Ning and that he died without an identifiable personal representative; the court exercised its discretion to grant final vesting orders on an ex parte basis and ordered vesting in terms of the Draft Order.
5 Sept 2024

RE CHEUNG SAI YIN

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2352
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1053/2024

Applicant proved by clear documentary evidence (Land Registry memorials, Approval of Succession, statutory declaration and certified death entry) that he is the beneficial owner of the half shares, that those shares were held by his mother as trustee who died intestate without a personal representative, and therefore the court was justified under section 45(e) of the Trustee Ordinance to vest the legal title of the half shares in the Applicant absolutely.
27 Mar 2024

TSANG WAI LUN v. WAN SIU FONG

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 885
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1359/2022

The joinder application was dismissed because the OS concerns the beneficial ownership dispute between Tsang and Wan and not the Company's distinct issue of whether to register a transfer; O.15 r.6(2)(b) was not satisfied and the Plaintiff may pursue a two-stage strategy, so forcing joinder would improperly compel the Plaintiff to litigate a separate cause prematurely.
27 Jun 2023

HUI KWOK HAU v. HUI MIMIE MEI MUI

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1654
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1603/2022

Given the 1931 vesting orders, registration of probate in the mortgagee's estate, subsequent conveyance by the executrix, long uninterrupted possession and absence of any challenge, any risk that the Mortgages were not properly foreclosed is theoretical and can be ignored; accordingly the Plaintiff has shown good title and the requisition has been sufficiently answered.
12 Jan 2023

CHAN SIOW YOON (陳筱雲), MA SO CHUN (馬素真), WAN FUNG SIN (尹鳳仙) and LAM SHUN YUEN (林純源) suing on behalf of SIN TIN TOA HOME FOR THE AGED (先天道安老院) AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 120
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1298/2021

Applicants A2–A5 fall within "persons otherwise interested in the trust" under s57A and the test of expediency was satisfied because the former trustees had died leaving no personal representatives and the trust faced failure; there was no evidence A2–A5 were unfit (no convictions, unsoundness or bankruptcy), each had signed consent and had longstanding connection to the charity; accordingly the court granted the order appointing A2–A5 as new trustees and directed consequential cost steps.
13 Jan 2022

HO MAN KIT and KONG SAU WAI as the joint and several trustees of the Property of LI BAO TIAN (a bankrupt) v. LO SIU CHU JUDY AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 133
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2016/2017

The court rejected the defendants' alleged arrangement as fabricated, found that the bankrupt (B) funded the money transfers and acquisitions and intended to gift/put assets beyond creditors; accordingly s.49 BO and s.60 CPO applied to the relevant transfers and dispositions and the equitable remedy is to vest the two properties in the trustees and to order repayment of earlier transfers, with interest and costs.
28 Oct 2021

JEREMY GAR YIN IP AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE OF THE HKSAR

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 3215
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1156/2021

Given the simple nature of the trust fund, the Applicants' willingness and fitness to act, and that the proposed Draft Deed preserves and better advances the charitable object, the court exercised its power under section 57A (and section 42 for trustee appointment) to discharge the custodian-trustee, appoint new trustees, vest the assets in them and approve the variation of the trust instrument, while relieving the outgoing trustee from personal liability except for fraud, dishonesty or wilful misconduct.
4 Aug 2020

TOKIĆ, D.O.O. v. HONGKONG SHUI FAT TRADING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1822
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA381/2020

Section 52(1)(e) of the Trustee Ordinance does not authorize vesting orders in respect of bank balances held by recipients of proceeds of fraud who are remedial constructive trustees or wrongdoers; the provision applies to true or de facto trustees only, therefore the court lacked jurisdiction to grant the sought vesting orders; alternative remedies (garnishee, HCO s25A orders) remain available.
24 Jun 2020

800 COLUMBIA PROJECT COMPANY LLC v. HONG KONG SHENSHILONG TRADE LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1293
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA153/2020

Default judgments for monetary and declaratory reliefs were properly granted because the plaintiff was properly served, defendants failed to defend, the plaintiff pleaded restitutionary claims and showed a genuine need for declaratory relief; however, vesting orders under section 52(1)(e) of the Trustee Ordinance were refused because s52 presupposes an appointment or change of trusteeship and a person declared a constructive trustee is not necessarily an appointee of the court for the purposes of s52(1)(e), so the statutory preconditions were not met; plaintiff may enforce the judgments by ga…
4 Oct 2016

RE NG TSUN WEI

Citation

RE NG TSUN WEI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1428/2016

The ex parte vesting order was refused because the Applicant failed to provide clear, satisfactory evidence that he is the sole beneficial owner and failed to discharge the duty of full and frank disclosure: material registered documents and the Lot 1978 Release indicate a later agreement (the 4th Action) that may have affected the Lands, and the Applicant did not explain or produce evidence as to its effect, so the court could not properly make a vesting order under s45(e).