File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
  • Find via Find It@HKUL
Supplementary

Article: Adverse possession and the principle of encroachment: Secretary for Justice v Chau Ka Chik Tso

TitleAdverse possession and the principle of encroachment: Secretary for Justice v Chau Ka Chik Tso
Authors
KeywordsAdverse possession
Encroachment
Estoppel
Hong Kong
Leaseholds
Issue Date2012
PublisherSweet & Maxwell Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/Catalogue/ProductDetails.aspx?recordid=333&productid=6598
Citation
Conveyancer and Property Lawyer, 2012, v. 76 n. 4, p. 333-342 How to Cite?
AbstractComments on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal decision in Secretary for Justice v Chau Ka Chik Tso on whether a lessor was barred from seeking possession of land adjacent to the demised land on which the lessee had encroached for longer than the limitation period. Notes the facts of the case and explains the common law principle of encroachment. Evaluates the majority approach based on adverse possession and the minority's estoppel analysis. Criticises the majority's reasoning and lack of authority for its conclusions. 'Abstract by Sweet & Maxwell' © 2013 Sweet & Maxwell
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/160073
ISSN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMerry, MJen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-16T06:02:33Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-16T06:02:33Z-
dc.date.issued2012en_US
dc.identifier.citationConveyancer and Property Lawyer, 2012, v. 76 n. 4, p. 333-342en_US
dc.identifier.issn0010-8200-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/160073-
dc.description.abstractComments on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal decision in Secretary for Justice v Chau Ka Chik Tso on whether a lessor was barred from seeking possession of land adjacent to the demised land on which the lessee had encroached for longer than the limitation period. Notes the facts of the case and explains the common law principle of encroachment. Evaluates the majority approach based on adverse possession and the minority's estoppel analysis. Criticises the majority's reasoning and lack of authority for its conclusions. 'Abstract by Sweet & Maxwell' © 2013 Sweet & Maxwell-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSweet & Maxwell Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/Catalogue/ProductDetails.aspx?recordid=333&productid=6598en_US
dc.relation.ispartofConveyancer and Property Lawyeren_US
dc.subjectAdverse possession-
dc.subjectEncroachment-
dc.subjectEstoppel-
dc.subjectHong Kong-
dc.subjectLeaseholds-
dc.titleAdverse possession and the principle of encroachment: Secretary for Justice v Chau Ka Chik Tsoen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailMerry, MJ: mmerry@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityMerry, MJ=rp01285en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros205187en_US
dc.identifier.volume76en_US
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.spage333-
dc.identifier.epage342-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats