Hsbc Trustee (Hong Kong) Ltd, The Sole Executor and Trustee of the Deceased’s Estate v. Lam Moon Wing and Others

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 333/2022 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 17 January 2022.

1. This is the application by the plaintiff for a Benjamin Order to deal with the administration of the Estate of Ng Man Pui where a prospective beneficiary named Ho Kam Por (“ HKP ”) had been missing and cannot be found for years.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCMP 333/2022[2023] HKCFI 199
Court
High Court CFI
Date17 Jan 2022
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP 333/2022

[2023] HKCFI 199

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 333 OF 2022

____________________

  IN THE MATTER of the estate of Madam Ng Man Pui, deceased (the “Deceased”)
  and
  IN THE MATTER of Ho Kam Por, the missing beneficiary
  and
  IN THE MATTER of Order 85, Rule 2 of the Rules of High Court (Cap 4A)

____________________

BETWEEN

HSBC TRUSTEE (HONG KONG) LIMITED, the sole executor and trustee of the Deceased’s estate Plaintiff
  and  
  LAM MOON WING 1st Defendant
  LAM MOON HON 2nd Defendant
  LAM ARTHUR KAR WING 3rd Defendant
  HO TING PO WILLIAM 4th Defendant

____________________

Before: Hon K Yeung J in Chamber
Date of Hearing: 17 January 2022
Date of Decision: 17 January 2022

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

1.This is the application by the plaintiff for a Benjamin Order to deal with the administration of the Estate of Ng Man Pui where a prospective beneficiary named Ho Kam Por (“HKP”) had been missing and cannot be found for years.

2.Apart from HKP, P has identified 12 surviving beneficiaries. Out of those 12, 8 have given prior indications that they would consent to a Benjamin Order being made, 3 prefer the giving of an indemnity, and 1 has not indicated any preference. Hence, with the necessary consent, only those non-consenting 4 have been named as defendants in the Originating Summons herein. The consenting 8 beneficiaries have nonetheless been given notice of commencement of these proceedings.

3.I have considered the various affirmations of service. I am satisfied that service has validly effected, within and outside jurisdiction, upon the defendants. D1 and D3 have filed acknowledgement of service indicating that they do not intend to defend the proceedings. D2 and D4 have filed none.

4.None of the defendants has shown up this morning. I deem it appropriate to proceed with the hearing in their absence.

5.I have read the affirmations placed before me, and in particular that of Susanna Fung of 12 April 2022. I have also considered the authorities cited before me, which include Re Benjamin [1902] 1 Ch 723, Williams, Mortimer & Sunnucks on Executors, Administrators and Probate (21st ed.), §65-18, Re Green’s Will Trusts [1985] 3 All ER 455 and Re Instant Cast Loans Ltd [2021] 1 EWHW 1164 (Ch). I note that extensive efforts have been made in tracing HKP. He has not been. In fact he has not been heard from or of for years. Given those extensive but unsuccessful efforts, the relatively small size of the residuary Estate, the preference of most of the surviving beneficiaries, and the costs analysis provided, I am satisfied that this is an appropriate case for this Court to make the Benjamin Order sought, that P be authorized and at liberty to administer the residuary estate and the trusts contained in Clause 3(c) of the Deceased’s Will dated 4 November 1999 on the footing that Ho Kam Por did not survive the Deceased.

6.Costs of this application be paid out of the Estate.

  (Keith Yeung)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Mr Johnny Ma SC instructed by Freda Lim & Co, for the Plaintiff

The 1st to 4th Defendants were not represented and did not appear