THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KA WING BUILDING v. CHOW CHUI CHUI AND OTHERS

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KA WING BUILDING v. CHOW CHUI CHUI AND OTHERS

The application to vary the costs order nisi was refused because the court was satisfied that briefing counsel in the underlying proceedings was not unreasonable given the novel legal questions concerning interpretation of the DMC, sub‑DMCs and the Building Management Ordinance and the substantial written submissions; nevertheless, costs of the variation application are awarded to the Former MC Members to be taxed at District Court Scale without a counsel certificate; the order nisi will become absolute if not varied within 14 days.

Citation
THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KA WING BUILDING v. CHOW CHUI CHUI AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 1st Respondent (ldbm 108/2013): CHOW CHUI CHUI; 2nd Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 2nd Respondent (ldbm 108/2013): LAM KAM CHUNG; 3rd Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 3rd Respondent (ldbm 108/2013): CHU CHIT YAN; 4th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 4th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013): LEUNG CHUNG CHIU; 5th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 6th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013): CHAN HING CHUN; 6th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 7th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013): HO WAN FUN; 7th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); Applicant (ldbm 108/2013): THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KA WING BUILDING; 1st Respondent (ldbm 299/2012): KAFULL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 2nd Respondent (ldbm 299/2012): CHAN SING HO; 3rd Respondent (ldbm 299/2012): FIRM HOME PROPERTIES LIMITED; 4th Respondent (ldbm 299/2012) (discontinued): AU NGO SUET; 5th Respondent (ldbm 299/2012): CHAINWILL INVESTMENT LIMITED; 6th Respondent (ldbm 299/2012): POLITFORD INVESTMENTS LIMITED; 5th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013) (acting in Person, Absent): LAU CHOR SANR
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 October 2014
Case Number
LDBM108/2013
Procedural Posture
Building Management Application (lands Tribunal) / Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi; Costs Variation Application Heard and Decided
Outcome
Application to vary the costs order nisi refused.
Legal Topics
Counsel Certificate, Costs Order Nisi, Interpretation of Deed of Mutual Covenant (dmc) and Sub‑dmcs, Building Management Ordinance, Taxation of Costs
Source Language
EN
Building Management Costs Law Civil Procedure Tribunal Practice Statutory Interpretation Counsel Certificate Costs Order Nisi Interpretation of Deed of Mutual Covenant (dmc) and Sub‑dmcs +2 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHOW CHUI CHUI

1st Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 1st Respondent (ldbm 108/2013)

LAM KAM CHUNG

2nd Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 2nd Respondent (ldbm 108/2013)

CHU CHIT YAN

3rd Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 3rd Respondent (ldbm 108/2013)

LEUNG CHUNG CHIU

4th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 4th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013)

CHAN HING CHUN

5th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 6th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013)

HO WAN FUN

6th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); 7th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013)

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KA WING BUILDING

7th Applicant (ldbm 299/2012); Applicant (ldbm 108/2013)

KAFULL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

1st Respondent (ldbm 299/2012)

CHAN SING HO

2nd Respondent (ldbm 299/2012)

FIRM HOME PROPERTIES LIMITED

3rd Respondent (ldbm 299/2012)

AU NGO SUET

4th Respondent (ldbm 299/2012) (discontinued)

CHAINWILL INVESTMENT LIMITED

5th Respondent (ldbm 299/2012)

POLITFORD INVESTMENTS LIMITED

6th Respondent (ldbm 299/2012)

LAU CHOR SANR

5th Respondent (ldbm 108/2013) (acting in Person, Absent)

Procedural Posture

Building Management Application (lands Tribunal) / Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi; Costs Variation Application Heard and Decided

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Substituting MC Members' application to vary the costs order nisi should be allowed
  2. 2 Whether a counsel certificate should be granted for costs in the underlying proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the issues in the underlying trial were sufficiently complex or novel to justify instructing counsel

Ratio Decidendi

The application to vary the costs order nisi was refused because the court was satisfied that briefing counsel in the underlying proceedings was not unreasonable given the novel legal questions concerning interpretation of the DMC, sub‑DMCs and the Building Management Ordinance and the substantial written submissions; nevertheless, costs of the variation application are awarded to the Former MC Members to be taxed at District Court Scale without a counsel certificate; the order nisi will become absolute if not varied within 14 days.

Court Disposition

Application to vary the costs order nisi refused.

Orders

  • Application for variation of the costs order nisi refused
  • Costs of the variation application to be paid to the Former Management Committee Members, to be taxed at District Court Scale with no counsel certificate