HONG KONG HOUSING SOCIETY AND ANOTHER v. WONG NAI CHUNG t/a SUN CHUNG FLOWER SHOP

HONG KONG HOUSING SOCIETY AND ANOTHER v. WONG NAI CHUNG t/a SUN CHUNG FLOWER SHOP

The Defendant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on appeal: the Urban Renewal Strategy did not apply to the inherited K21 resumption process; the 30 November 2004 material met the s.15(4)(b)(ii) requirement; the Defendant offered no adequate explanation for delay; no proper foundation for fresh evidence was shown; accordingly leave to appeal and a stay of execution were refused and costs awarded to the Plaintiffs.

Citation
HONG KONG HOUSING SOCIETY AND ANOTHER v. WONG NAI CHUNG t/a SUN CHUNG FLOWER SHOP
Parties
Plaintiff: 1st Plaintiff; Plaintiff: 2nd Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 April 2009
Case Number
DCCJ3620/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Possession/land; Statutory Challenge to Notice of Resumption / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following Summary Judgment
Outcome
Defendant's summonses dated 20 February 2009 and 23 March 2009 dismissed; leave to appeal refused; stay of execution refused
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Leave to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Statutory Interpretation, Land Resumption, Fresh Evidence (ladd V Marshall), Delay/laches as Defence
Source Language
EN
Land Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Public Law Housing Law Summary Judgment Leave to Appeal Stay of Execution +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

1st Plaintiff

Plaintiff

2nd Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Possession/land; Statutory Challenge to Notice of Resumption / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against summary judgment
  2. 2 Whether the Urban Renewal Strategy applied to an inherited development proposal (K21) and to the Secretary's recommendation
  3. 3 Whether the material supplied satisfied s.15(4)(b)(ii) of the repealed Land Development Corporation Ordinance

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on appeal: the Urban Renewal Strategy did not apply to the inherited K21 resumption process; the 30 November 2004 material met the s.15(4)(b)(ii) requirement; the Defendant offered no adequate explanation for delay; no proper foundation for fresh evidence was shown; accordingly leave to appeal and a stay of execution were refused and costs awarded to the Plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Defendant's summonses dated 20 February 2009 and 23 March 2009 dismissed; leave to appeal refused; stay of execution refused

Orders

  • Dismissing the two Summonses dated 20 February 2009 and 23 March 2009
  • Costs of and occasioned by the two Summonses to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs with certificate for two counsel, to be taxed if not agreed