AMPSLEY CO LTD v. SHUEN ON FURNITURE LTD

AMPSLEY CO LTD v. SHUEN ON FURNITURE LTD

On the material before the court the disputed items reasonably appeared to be in the tenant's apparent possession as at execution of the Warrant under s87; the claimant's asserted title was not resolved on the papers but must be substantiated by an affirmed statement and supporting documents under s96; accordingly the court adjourned the sale and directed exchange of affirmed evidence with costs reserved.

Citation
AMPSLEY CO LTD v. SHUEN ON FURNITURE LTD
Parties
Plaintiff (landlord): Landlord; Defendant (tenant): Tenant; Claimant (third Party): Claimant; Senior Bailiff: Senior Bailiff
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 September 2012
Case Number
DCDT2354/2012
Procedural Posture
Distraint Proceedings Under Landlord and Tenant (consolidation) Ordinance Part III / Hearing of Bailiff's Summons; Interim Directions and Adjournment Pending Affirmed Evidence
Outcome
Hearing adjourned; directions given for affirmed evidence and documents; sale deferred pending further hearing; costs reserved
Legal Topics
Distraint, Apparent Possession, Ownership of Chattels, Interpleader, Sale at Public Auction, Costs
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Property Civil Procedure Distraint Apparent Possession Ownership of Chattels Interpleader Sale at Public Auction +1 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 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Landlord

Plaintiff (landlord)

Tenant

Defendant (tenant)

Claimant

Claimant (third Party)

Senior Bailiff

Senior Bailiff

Procedural Posture

Distraint Proceedings Under Landlord and Tenant (consolidation) Ordinance Part III / Hearing of Bailiff's Summons; Interim Directions and Adjournment Pending Affirmed Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disputed items were in the tenant's apparent possession when the bailiff executed the warrant under s87
  2. 2 Who owns the disputed items and whether the Consignment Agreement establishes claimant's title
  3. 3 Whether the goods (including disputed items) should be ordered sold at public auction

Ratio Decidendi

On the material before the court the disputed items reasonably appeared to be in the tenant's apparent possession as at execution of the Warrant under s87; the claimant's asserted title was not resolved on the papers but must be substantiated by an affirmed statement and supporting documents under s96; accordingly the court adjourned the sale and directed exchange of affirmed evidence with costs reserved.

Court Disposition

Hearing adjourned; directions given for affirmed evidence and documents; sale deferred pending further hearing; costs reserved

Orders

  • Claimant to file and serve a duly affirmed Affirmation by 4:00 pm on 9 October 2012 confirming claim to ownership and circumstances of the 5 April 2012 Consignment Agreement and exhibit true and complete copies of all documents relating to the claim
  • Plaintiff liberty to file and serve an Affirmation in Reply by 4:00 pm on 12 October 2012