曾婉玲 v. 兆隆苑業主立案法團

曾婉玲 v. 兆隆苑業主立案法團

The Tribunal refused declaratory relief because the defect in notice for the 22 April 2001 meeting was rendered academic by the subsequent properly convened meeting on 25 May 2001; the declaration would serve no useful purpose and intervention would not be in the owners' collective interest. Applicant awarded costs up to and including 26 June 2001 but not for the later hearing on 29 August 2001.

Citation
曾婉玲 v. 兆隆苑業主立案法團
Parties
Applicant / Former Chairman of Management Committee: Applicant; Respondent / Incorporated Owners' Management Committee: Respondent (Management Committee of Siu Lung Court)
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 September 2001
Case Number
LDBM199/2001
Procedural Posture
Building Management Dispute Under the Building Management Ordinance (declaratory Relief) / Final Judgment (lands Tribunal)
Outcome
Application for a declaratory declaration that the 22 April 2001 meeting was null and void refused; no declaration granted.
Legal Topics
Notice Requirements for General Meetings, Declaratory Relief, Costs Allocation, Reckoning of Time
Source Language
EN
Building Management Equity (declaratory Relief) Civil Procedure Notice Requirements for General Meetings Declaratory Relief Costs Allocation Reckoning of Time

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant

Applicant / Former Chairman of Management Committee

Respondent (Management Committee of Siu Lung Court)

Respondent / Incorporated Owners' Management Committee

Procedural Posture

Building Management Dispute Under the Building Management Ordinance (declaratory Relief) / Final Judgment (lands Tribunal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notice for the general meeting of 22 April 2001 complied with the Third Schedule to the Building Management Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to grant declaratory relief after a subsequent meeting (25 May 2001) that cured the defect
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant is entitled to costs and for what period

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal refused declaratory relief because the defect in notice for the 22 April 2001 meeting was rendered academic by the subsequent properly convened meeting on 25 May 2001; the declaration would serve no useful purpose and intervention would not be in the owners' collective interest. Applicant awarded costs up to and including 26 June 2001 but not for the later hearing on 29 August 2001.

Court Disposition

Application for a declaratory declaration that the 22 April 2001 meeting was null and void refused; no declaration granted.

Orders

  • Declaration refused: no declaratory relief granted in respect of the 22 April 2001 meeting
  • Cost order nisi: Respondent to bear Applicant's costs up to and including the hearing on 26 June 2001