Read the full judgment text of CACV 000032/1999 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 3 February 2000 before Leong JA, Woo JA, Pang J.
Civil law – property – beneficial ownership of temple and its properties – Taoist temple Tsing Wan Kun at Tsing Shan Monastery, Tuen Mun, New Territories – registered under Block Crown Lease in name of Tsing Wan Kun with Tang Po Yun and To Tong Hing as managers – plaintiffs as managers of To Ka Yi Tso and representatives of To Clan claim beneficial ownership – Secretary for Justice as parens patriae for charity counterclaiming that properties held on charitable trust – whether To Clan established and owned Tsing Wan Kun before British Administration in 1898 – wooden epitaph in temple naming To Ka Yi as founder and donor of land to temple – memorial stone with To Clan donations from 1843 – Lantern Lighting Ceremony at temple by To Clan since 1859 – Sung Tip granting management of temple to Chan Chun Ting for $360 in 1914 – Account Record Book recording tax duties of To Clan for temple fields – first issue on whether land is 'temple land' within Lockhart Report – held that Block Crown Lease description of 'temple lots' was descriptive of usage at time of grant and not purpose; land was capable of ownership by a clan, family or tong under s 13 of New Territories Land Ordinance 1905 – second issue on whether Chinese Temple Ordinance Cap 153 applies to Tsing Wan Kun – held that Ordinance applies to all Chinese temples unless exempted under Schedule, but registration does not transform a privately-owned temple into a charity where it was not established for charitable purposes – third issue on charitable trust – held that no institution of charitable trust exists in Chinese customary law and plaintiffs' ownership prevents temple from being a charitable institution – fourth issue on burden of proof – held that main issue is whether plaintiffs are beneficial owners; if plaintiffs succeed, 2nd defendant's case on charitable trust fails; Order of Godfrey J did not bind plaintiffs who were not parties – fifth issue on capacity of plaintiffs – held that managers of To Ka Yi Tso and representatives of To Clan had authority to bring proceedings; no representation order required under Order 15 r 13 – Court of Appeal affirmed trial judge's finding that the plaintiffs proved on the balance of probabilities they were the beneficial owners of Tsing Wan Kun and its properties – appeal dismissed – costs of appeal to be determined – subsequent FACV8/2000 dated 22 December 2000 confirmed appeal dismissed.
Legal issues: Beneficial ownership of Tsing Wan Kun temple and properties · Whether the land is 'temple land' within the Lockhart Report definition · Whether the Chinese Temple Ordinance, Cap. 153 applies to Tsing Wan Kun · Whether the properties are subject to a charitable trust · Burden of proof in the proceedings · Capacity of the plaintiffs
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 1 case