Read the full judgment text of CACV 000227/1996 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 27 February 1997 before Nazareth VP, Godfrey JA, Liu JA.
Land law – adverse possession – proprietary estoppel – New Territories land – action for possession – application under Order 18 r.19 and O.14 – whether defences should be struck out – whether 30 years' possession disclosed an arguable case of adverse possession – whether passive encouragement of building works on land supports a plea of proprietary estoppel – whether non-disclosure of a party's death warrants dismissal of the appeal – Chow/knowledge of improvements and absence of objection from registered owners – modifications of tenancy granted in the name of registered owner but signed by possessors – duty to warn arises where landowner stands by while another builds on his land – equity may arise from passive as well as active encouragement – Privy Council overruling of this court's decision in the Lam Island case (Chung Ping Kwan and Cheung Yuet Han and Lai Moon Hang v. Lam Island Development Company Limited, 8 July 1996) – distinction of Kung Wong Sau Hin v. Sze To Chun Keung (CACV 61, 62 & 63 of 1996) on facts – mistake as to enduring nature of power of attorney negating conscious wrongdoing – Order 15 r.15 appointment of representative for deceased defendant – appeal allowed – action to proceed to trial – costs consequences may follow from non-disclosure.
Legal issues: Whether the adverse possession defence should be struck out following the Privy Council's Lam Island decision · Whether the proprietary estoppel plea should be struck out · Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-disclosure of the 3rd defendant's death
Outcome: Appeal allowed; defences not struck out; action to proceed to trial.
Cited by 1 case