|
HCMP 836/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 836 OF 2012
______________________
| |
IN THE MATTER OF All that 1/1,300th part or share of and in The Remaining Portion of Section A of New Kowloon Marine Lot No 25 (Flat B on 16th Floor, No 120 Broadway, MeiFoo Sun Chuen, Kowloon) |
| |
and |
| |
IN THE MATTER OF Order 113, Rule 2 of the Rules of the High Court, Cap 4A |
______________________
| BETWEEN |
|
|
| |
SZETO CHAK MEI, the sole administratrix of the unadministered properties of the late SZETO CHIU, deceased |
Plaintiff |
| |
and |
|
| |
CHAN LAM SHAN(陳藍珊) |
1st Defendant |
| |
SZETO YAN YEE(司徒欣頤) |
2nd Defendant |
| |
SZETO KEI YAN(司徒基仁) |
3rd Defendant |
| |
KEUNG MAN SHAN |
4th Defendant |
| |
(transliterated as 姜雯珊) |
|
| |
ALL OTHER PERSONS NOW IN OCCUPATION OF FLAT B, 16TH FLOOR, NO 120 BROADWAY, MEI FOO CHUEN, KOWLOON |
5th Defendant |
______________________
| Before: Hon G Lam J in Chambers (Open to public) |
| Date of Hearing: 20 August 2015 |
| Date of Decision: 20 August 2015 |
______________
D E C I S I O N
______________
1. I give leave for the 1st defendant to file the supplemental witness statement attached to the summons dated 20 July 2015, but only in respect of paragraphs 6 to 11 and paragraph 14. Much of the other paragraphs, as I see the position, is irrelevant, of no or no sufficient probative value.
2. Some of the allegations involved are allegations concerning other siblings who have not so far been called as witnesses by either side, and some of whom, as I understand the position, reside overseas. There is little justification for admitting those paragraphs at this stage when the trial will be coming up in November.
3. As far as paragraphs 12 and 13 are concerned, they deal with the present or recent personal circumstances of the 1st defendant and the financial contribution she receives from her children. Mr Leung has not been able to satisfy me how these matters are relevant to the question of proprietary estoppel, or to the extent of the interest of the 1st defendant in the property if she establishes her case of proprietary estoppel or to the reliefs that would be just to reflect such interest as she is able to establish in these circumstances.
4. The appropriate order, in my opinion, is to give leave to admit the paragraphs that I have already mentioned.
5. So I will give leave to the 1st defendant to file and adduce her supplemental witness statement dated 16 July 2015, with paragraphs 1 to 5 and paragraphs 12 to 13 redacted.
6. Service of the supplemental witness statement be dispensed with.
7. The plaintiff do have leave to file and serve a supplemental witness statement in reply, if any, within 21 days hereof.
8. The parties’ supplemental witness statements do stand as evidence‑in‑chief at the trial unless otherwise directed by the trial judge.
(Submissions as to costs)
9. I will order costs in cause in relation to the 1st defendant’s summons dated 20 July 2015.
(Further submissions as to costs)
10. The 1st defendant’s own costs be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations.
| |
(Godfrey Lam) |
| |
Judge of the Court of First Instance |
| |
High Court |
Mr Jeffrey Li, instructed by Christine M Koo & Ip, for the plaintiff
Mr Paul H M Leung, instructed by C L Chow & Macksion Chan, assigned by Director of Legal Aid, for the 1st defendant
|