Re Tang Chuen Kwai
Read the full judgment text of HCMP 114/2015 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 27 January 2015.
1. The applicant is 74 years old. According to a Succession dated 7 May 1954 registered at the Land Registry by Memorial No YL1321589 (hereinafter called “the Succession”), he succeeded to and became the beneficial owner of a property known as “ALL THAT piece or parcel of ground registered in the Land Registry as SEK KONG TSUN LOT NO 101 IN DEMARCATION DISTRICT NO 125” (hereinafter called “the property”) that was previously owned by his father, Tang Kam Yau, deceased, with his mother, Tang Yeung
Cited by 1 case
|
HCMP 114/2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 114 OF 2015 ____________
____________
____________
_______________ J U D G M E M T _______________ I. INTRODUCTION 1.The applicant is 74 years old. According to a Succession dated 7 May 1954 registered at the Land Registry by Memorial No YL1321589 (hereinafter called “the Succession”), he succeeded to and became the beneficial owner of a property known as “ALL THAT piece or parcel of ground registered in the Land Registry as SEK KONG TSUN LOT NO 101 IN DEMARCATION DISTRICT NO 125” (hereinafter called “the property”) that was previously owned by his father, Tang Kam Yau, deceased, with his mother, Tang Yeung Shi, as his trustee. 2.The applicant explained that although the Succession described the subject property as Sek Kong Tsun House No 101, it actually referred to the property, and this was borne out by the reference to the Succession as Memorial No YL1321589 in the land search in respect of the property as the instrument evidencing the applicant’s status as beneficial owner thereof. By a letter dated 22 January 2015 from the Lands Department to the applicant’s solicitors, it was confirmed that Sek Kong Tsun House No 101 was the same as the property described in the Succession, being Memorial No YL1321589. 3.The applicant further explained that his mother’s true name was Yeung Yau Lan and she was named as Tang Yeung Shi in the Succession because it was then common for married women to be named in such manner, ie by adopting the surname of her husband followed by her maiden surname and ending with the character “Shi”. Since the applicant’s father was surnamed Tang and his mother’s maiden surname was Yeung, she was named Tang Yeung Shi in the Succession. 4.The applicant’s mother, Tang Yeung Shi, or Yeung Yau Lan, passed away on 15 January 2013. The applicant wanted to redevelop the house on the property. On 21 November 2014, the New Territories Action Team of the Lands Department wrote to the applicant requiring him to remove his mother as trustee of the property and to vest the property in his name before they would process his application for redevelopment. 5.The applicant advised that his mother, Tang Yeung Shi, did not hold any property of which she had beneficial interest during her lifetime, so no grant of probate or letters of administration had been issued in respect of her estate. 6.Chan Chun Pong, the clerk to the applicant’s solicitors, confirmed by affirmation that he had carried out a probate search at the Probate Registry on 6 January 2015, and the results were that no grant of probate or letters of administration had ever been issued in respect of the estate of Tang Yeung Shi or Yeung Yau Lan. 7.On 15 January 2015, the applicant issued an ex parte originating summons for an order under section 45 of the Trustee Ordinance, Cap 29, that Tang Yeung Shi, deceased, be removed as trustee of the property and that the entire legal and beneficial estate of and in the property do vest in the applicant absolutely. 8.The applicant made the application on the basis that he is sui juris and entitled to the property by virtue of the Succession dated 6 May 1954. 9.I am satisfied in the circumstances that there is no one to be served with the originating summons and that it will be in order for the application to proceed on ex parte basis. 10.I therefore make an order that:
11.I make no order as to costs.
Ms Leung Ki-hin, Constance, of Leung Kin & Co, for the applicant |
Other judgments that cite this case