NG TAM YUE v. HO HON FU ALEXANDER

NG TAM YUE v. HO HON FU ALEXANDER

Further interim stay was refused and the interim stay uplifted because the Respondent refused to pay any arrears into court as a condition for stay, his legal aid application was refused and his appeal lacked reasonable prospect of success, and he had engaged in delaying conduct; accordingly enforcement of the writ of possession was permitted.

Citation
NG TAM YUE v. HO HON FU ALEXANDER
Parties
Applicant (landlord): NG TAM YUE; Respondent (tenant): HO HON FU ALEXANDER
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 June 2005
Case Number
LDPD2854/2004
Procedural Posture
Lands Tribunal Application for Recovery of Possession and Arrears of Rent/mesne Profits / Hearing on Interlocutory Summons for Interim Stay of Execution (7 June 2005)
Outcome
Application for interim stay dismissed; interim stay uplifted; writ of possession may be enforced; costs nisi awarded to Applicant
Legal Topics
Possession, Relief Against Forfeiture, Stay of Execution, Writ of Possession, Costs
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Civil Procedure Legal Aid Possession Relief Against Forfeiture Stay of Execution Writ of Possession Costs

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NG TAM YUE

Applicant (landlord)

HO HON FU ALEXANDER

Respondent (tenant)

Procedural Posture

Lands Tribunal Application for Recovery of Possession and Arrears of Rent/mesne Profits / Hearing on Interlocutory Summons for Interim Stay of Execution (7 June 2005)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further interim stay of execution of writ of possession should be granted pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether refusal of legal aid and absence of reasonable prospects of success justify refusal of stay
  3. 3 Whether payment of arrears into court is an appropriate condition for granting a stay

Ratio Decidendi

Further interim stay was refused and the interim stay uplifted because the Respondent refused to pay any arrears into court as a condition for stay, his legal aid application was refused and his appeal lacked reasonable prospect of success, and he had engaged in delaying conduct; accordingly enforcement of the writ of possession was permitted.

Court Disposition

Application for interim stay dismissed; interim stay uplifted; writ of possession may be enforced; costs nisi awarded to Applicant

Orders

  • The summons application filed by the Respondent on 19 May 2005 for interim stay of execution of writ of possession is dismissed.
  • The interim stay of execution of the writ previously granted is uplifted forthwith and the Applicant may enforce the writ of possession issued on 5 May 2005.