Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Hong Kong | 1-800-335-6202

Wong Yiu v Leung Sum And Another

Judgment Cited authorities 4 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date03 December 1987
Year1987
Judgement NumberHCMP2421/1987
Subject MatterMiscellaneous Proceedings
CourtHigh Court (Hong Kong)
HCMP002421/1987 WONG YIU v. LEUNG SUM AND ANOTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HONG KONG

M.P. No. 2421 of 1987

HEADNOTE

One of the vendors of property was described in the conveyance to the vendors by a name slightly different from that appearing on his identity card. The purchasers were represented in the conveyancing transaction by the same solicitors as the vendors, but appeared in person before the Court.

HELD : The facts did not appear to raise any real question as to title, but the application would be adjourned to enable the vendors' solicitors further to consider the matter.

(Observations on the undesirability of solicitors acting for both parties in a conveyancing transaction and of vendors' solicitors causing purchasers to appear before the Court in person.)

M.P. No. 2421 of 1987

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

HIGH COURT

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS

____________________________

IN THE MATTER of an Agreement dated 12th October 1987 and made between WONG CHUNG KWAN and WONG YIU also known as WONG YIU KWAN and LEUNG SUM and LEUNG SUI YING for the sale and purchase of All those pieces or parcels of ground registered in the Land Office as The Remaining Portion of Subsection 13 of Section A of Kowloon Inland Lot No. 1301 and The Remaining Portion of Subsection 14 of Section A of Kowloon Inland Lot No. 1301 together with the messuages erections and buildings thereon known at the date hereof as Flat D, Fourth Floor of Foremost Building, Kowloon, Hong Kong.

and
IN THE MATTER of Mr. Wong Yiu also known as Wong Yiu Kwan

and
IN THE MATTER of Section 12 of the Conveyancing and Property ordinance Chapter 219

BETWEEN

WONG YIU alias WONG YIU KWAN Plaintiff

and
LEUNG SUM and LEUNG SUI YING Defendants

___________________________

Coram: The Hon. Mr. Justice Godfrey in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 3rd December 1987

Date of Delivery of Judgment: 3rd December 1987

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

1. This is a vendor and purchaser summons (as usual, with an unnecessarily long-winded title). A vendor or purchaser of land may apply by such a summons to the Court in respect of any question arising out of or connected with any contract for the sale of land, and the Court may make such order upon the summons and as to the costs as to the Court appears just: see S.12 (1) of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance, Cap. 219.

2. This provision of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance is the equivalent in Hong Kong of what is now s.49(1) of the English Law of Property Act, 1925 (it was originally enacted in 1874).

3. As the English authorities show, the proper purpose of a vendor and purchaser summons is really to obtain, in a summary way, a decision on isolated points about which the parties are at issue, and which would otherwise have to be resolved in an action. For example, a vendor and purchaser summons may properly be taken out when there is a question as to whether a requisition has been sufficiently answered or an objection sufficiently met; or for settling minor points of law or of construction: see In re Burroughs (1877) 5 Ch. D. 601.

4. And the decision binds the parties only: see In re Naylor and Spendla's Contract (1886) 34 Ch. D. 217 per Cotton LJ at p.220. Accordingly the point decided on a vendor and purchaser summons as between one vendor and his purchaser may be raised again when the purchaser re-sells: see In re Osborne's Contract (1880) 13 Ch. D. 774.

5. So the jurisdiction of the Court on a vendor and purchaser summons is declaratory, not curative. There appears to be a belief in Hong Kong that the purpose of a vendor and purchaser summons is to enable a vendor who, having considered the state of his own title, and having seen that there is or may be something technically wrong with it, to come to the Court, ex parte if he chooses in order to get the Court to declare that there is a "good title" to the property, whether or not that is the case. This is not...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT