header-logo header-logo

31 January 2025 / Imogen Dodds , Jamie Sutherland
Issue: 8102 / Categories: Features , Construction , Property , Limitation , International
printer mail-detail

A constructive construction project?

205948
Imogen Dodds & Jamie Sutherland consider a Hong Kong case that gives clarity on limitation periods in constructive trust claims
  • In Hui Chun Ping v Hui Kau Mo [2024] HKCFA 32, Lord Hoffmann confirmed in the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal that claims against category 2 constructive trustees (ie, people whose trusteeship arises from a wrongful act) do not fall within the equivalent provision of s 21(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980.
  • Accordingly, claims by a beneficiary to recover trust property from a category 2 constructive trustee are not excluded from the application of limitation periods.
  • Instead, such claims are subject to the usual six-year limitation period.

The Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong published its decision in Hui Chun Ping v Hui Kau Mo [2024] HKCFA 32 on 23 December 2024, with the lead judgment given by Lord Hoffmann. It is of interest to those practising in England and Wales, as the statutory provision considered by the court is in materially identical

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll