ORIENTAL GENERATION LTD AND OTHERS v. LUK YUNG AND OTHERS

ORIENTAL GENERATION LTD AND OTHERS v. LUK YUNG AND OTHERS

Tribunal granted leave for two additional experts (an Authorized Person on plot ratio utilization; a town planning expert on rezoning prospects and impact) because the issues are specialised and beyond the ordinary competence of valuation surveyors and are relevant to setting the reserve price (RDV). The tribunal refused to direct a single joint expert given the contentious nature and likelihood of severe challenge; it dismissed the staying summons as speculative and not justified. Directions were given for prompt exchange and joint statements of expert evidence and consequential timetable adjustments; costs ordered each party to bear own costs (costs order nisi). Delay by R40 was a...

Citation
ORIENTAL GENERATION LTD AND OTHERS v. LUK YUNG AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant (1st): Oriental Generation Limited; Applicant (2nd): China Creation Investment Limited; Applicant (3rd): Smart Beauty Limited; Applicant (4th): Wong Wing Wah; Respondents (1st): Ngo Kui Sing and Ng Sau Chun; Respondents (2nd): Luk Yung, Chow Chi Wah and Ip Wai Har; Respondent (8th): Chan Ying Wing; Respondent (9th): Tse Kam Wing; Respondent (13th): Chan Kit Kwong; Respondent (22nd): Get Luck Investment Limited; Respondent (33rd): Respondents (33rd); Respondent (34th): Respondents (34th); Respondent (35th): Respondents (35th); Respondent (36th): Respondents (36th); Respondent (37th): Respondents (37th); Respondent (38th): Respondents (38th); Respondent (40th): 40th Respondent (named in judgment); Respondent (44th): 44th Respondent; Respondent (46th): 46th Respondent (Yenny Pontoh)
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 February 2015
Case Number
LDCS4000/2013
Procedural Posture
Land (compulsory Sale for Redevelopment) Application Under Lcsro; Interlocutory Applications / Interlocutory Hearing on Expert Evidence and Staying Summons; Pre Trial Directions (trial Set to Commence 2 March 2015)
Outcome
Expert summons granted in part; staying summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Stay of Proceedings, Discovery, Valuation, Plot Ratio, Rezoning
Source Language
EN
Land Law Compulsory Purchase Civil Procedure Planning Law Tribunal Practice Expert Evidence Stay of Proceedings Discovery +3 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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oriental Generation Limited

Applicant (1st)

China Creation Investment Limited

Applicant (2nd)

Smart Beauty Limited

Applicant (3rd)

Wong Wing Wah

Applicant (4th)

Ngo Kui Sing and Ng Sau Chun

Respondents (1st)

Luk Yung, Chow Chi Wah and Ip Wai Har

Respondents (2nd)

Chan Ying Wing

Respondent (8th)

Tse Kam Wing

Respondent (9th)

Chan Kit Kwong

Respondent (13th)

Get Luck Investment Limited

Respondent (22nd)

Respondents (33rd)

Respondent (33rd)

Respondents (34th)

Respondent (34th)

Respondents (35th)

Respondent (35th)

Respondents (36th)

Respondent (36th)

Respondents (37th)

Respondent (37th)

Respondents (38th)

Respondent (38th)

40th Respondent (named in judgment)

Respondent (40th)

44th Respondent

Respondent (44th)

46th Respondent (Yenny Pontoh)

Respondent (46th)

Procedural Posture

Land (compulsory Sale for Redevelopment) Application Under Lcsro; Interlocutory Applications / Interlocutory Hearing on Expert Evidence and Staying Summons; Pre Trial Directions (trial Set to Commence 2 March 2015)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tribunal should permit additional expert evidence (an Authorized Person and a town planning expert)
  2. 2 Whether to order single joint experts or separate experts
  3. 3 Whether to stay proceedings pending appeal or determination of preliminary issues

Ratio Decidendi

Tribunal granted leave for two additional experts (an Authorized Person on plot ratio utilization; a town planning expert on rezoning prospects and impact) because the issues are specialised and beyond the ordinary competence of valuation surveyors and are relevant to setting the reserve price (RDV). The tribunal refused to direct a single joint expert given the contentious nature and likelihood of severe challenge; it dismissed the staying summons as speculative and not justified. Directions were given for prompt exchange and joint statements of expert evidence and consequential timetable adjustments; costs ordered each party to bear own costs (costs order nisi). Delay by R40 was a...

Court Disposition

Expert summons granted in part; staying summons dismissed

Orders

  • Leave granted to adduce expert evidence by an Authorized Person on whether maximum plot ratio of the KTM site can be fully utilized given the three restrictions in OZP 28
  • Leave granted to adduce expert evidence by a town planning expert on (a) prospect of success of town planning application No. Y/K13/1 and (b) impact on development parameters if Y/K13/1 is granted