FIRST KIND LTD v. WONG SHEK AND OTHERS

FIRST KIND LTD v. WONG SHEK AND OTHERS

Leave to appeal was refused because applicants failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or any other reason in the interests of justice under s.11AA(6); the Tribunal correctly applied the compensation approach to the preliminary issues and its exercise of discretion was not plainly wrong or legally erroneous.

Citation
FIRST KIND LTD v. WONG SHEK AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: First Kind Limited; Respondents: Participating respondents represented by Lo & Lo (various minority respondents); Respondents: Participating respondents represented by Chui & Lau (1st to 8th respondents in LDCS20000/2014); 1st Respondent: CHOI FEI MAN RONNIE; 2nd Respondent: WONG LAI KING; 3rd Respondent: KWAN MING FAI; 4th Respondent: NG CHEUNG FONG; 5th Respondent: CHAN WUN CHEUNG; 6th Respondent: CHAN WANG KIN; 7th Respondent: CHIANG KWOK KEUNG; 8th Respondent: MAK PING YIM
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 March 2017
Case Number
LDCS15000/2014
Procedural Posture
Land Compulsory Sale Application (lcsro) / Application for Leave to Appeal on Costs (leave Refused)
Outcome
Applicants' six summonses for leave to appeal were dismissed
Legal Topics
Compensation Approach, Costs Orders, Leave to Appeal, Lands Tribunal Discretion
Source Language
EN
Land Law Costs Civil Procedure Administrative Law Compensation Approach Costs Orders Leave to Appeal Lands Tribunal Discretion

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

First Kind Limited

Applicant

Participating respondents represented by Lo & Lo (various minority respondents)

Respondents

Participating respondents represented by Chui & Lau (1st to 8th respondents in LDCS20000/2014)

Respondents

CHOI FEI MAN RONNIE

1st Respondent

WONG LAI KING

2nd Respondent

KWAN MING FAI

3rd Respondent

NG CHEUNG FONG

4th Respondent

CHAN WUN CHEUNG

5th Respondent

CHAN WANG KIN

6th Respondent

CHIANG KWOK KEUNG

7th Respondent

MAK PING YIM

8th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Land Compulsory Sale Application (lcsro) / Application for Leave to Appeal on Costs (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against costs orders made by the Lands Tribunal
  2. 2 Whether the compensation approach established in Good Faith Properties applies to preliminary issues in LCSRO proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal misapplied its discretion or was plainly wrong in ordering costs as it did

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because applicants failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or any other reason in the interests of justice under s.11AA(6); the Tribunal correctly applied the compensation approach to the preliminary issues and its exercise of discretion was not plainly wrong or legally erroneous.

Court Disposition

Applicants' six summonses for leave to appeal were dismissed

Orders

  • Applicants\' six summonses for leave to appeal dismissed
  • Costs to be paid by the applicants to the respective participating respondents on High Court scale with certificate for counsel