|
HCMP 1053/2024
[2024] HKCFI 2352
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 1053 OF 2024
_______________
|
|
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 45 OF THE TRUSTEE ORDINANCE,
CAP 29
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
IN THE MATTER of ½ share of and in all those pieces or parcels of grounds registered in the Land Registry as:
|
|
|
(i) Lot 1311;
|
|
|
(ii) Lot 1348;
|
|
|
(iii) Lot 1369;
|
|
|
(iv) Lot 1927;
|
|
|
(v) Section B of Lot 1928;
|
|
|
(vi) Lot 2569;
|
|
|
(vii) Lot 2596; and
|
|
|
(viii) The Remaining Portion of Lot 2617, all in Demarcation District No. 39
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
IN THE MATTER of an application by Cheung Sai Yin (張世賢)
|
_______________
|
BETWEEN
|
|
|
CHEUNG SAI YIN (張世賢)
|
Applicant
|
_______________
|
Before:
|
Deputy High Court Judge KC Chan in Chambers
|
|
Date of Hearing:
|
3 September 2024
|
|
Date of Judgment:
|
3 September 2024
|
|
Date of Reasons for Judgment:
|
5 September 2024
|
_____________________________
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
_____________________________
1.
Before me was the application by
ex-parte
Originating Summons dated 17 June 2024, pursuant to section 45(e) of the Trustee Ordinance, for a order vesting in the Applicant the legal title of the half shares of and in the following 8 lots of land all of which are in Demarcation District No 39 (“
the Subject Lots
”):
a. Lot No 1311;
b. Lot No 1348;
c. Lot No 1369;
d. Lot No 1927;
e. Section B of Lot No 1928;
f. Lot No Lot No 2569;
g. Lot No 2596; and
h. The Remaining Portion of Lot No 2617.
2.
Section 45(e) of the Trustee Ordinance
Cap 29
provides:
“
45. Vesting orders of land
In any of the following cases, namely –
…
(e) where there is no personal representative of a deceased trustee who was entitled to or possessed of any interest in land, or where it is uncertain who is the personal representative of a deceased trustee who was entitled to or possessed of any interest in land;
…
the court may make an order (in this Ordinance called a
vesting order
) vesting the land or interest therein in any such person in any such manner and for any such estate or interest as the court may direct, or releasing or disposing of the contingent right to such person as the court may direct…”
3.
It is well established that the Court may make a vesting order under section 45(e) in an
ex parte
application if there is clear evidence before the Court justifying the making of such order, but the Court must proceed cautiously and must examine the evidence presented by the applicant critically, and where there are gaps in the applicant’s evidence, the Court should require the applicant to address them by satisfactory evidence or provide proper explanation as to why, despite the exercise of reasonable diligence, the applicant canno
| 
Back
