A18 LTD v. THE FIRST TELEPHONE MOTEL CO LTD

A18 LTD v. THE FIRST TELEPHONE MOTEL CO LTD

The Tribunal was entitled to refuse adjournment because sickness alone did not justify delay and the corporate respondent should have authorised representation; a related District Court action did not prevent the Lands Tribunal from proceeding on rent and possession claims; applicants proved arrears and deposited funds did not discharge ongoing rent from 1 February 2016; therefore original orders for possession, mesne profits and costs were correctly made and the review disclosed no new material to disturb those orders.

Citation
A18 LTD v. THE FIRST TELEPHONE MOTEL CO LTD
Parties
1st Applicant/landlord: A18 Limited; 2nd Applicant/landlord: Star China Investment Limited; Respondent/tenant: Respondent
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 March 2016
Case Number
LDPD79/2016
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant Recovery of Possession and Rent Arrears / Decision on Review of Tribunal Orders (post Hearing)
Outcome
Review application dismissed; original orders upheld.
Legal Topics
Recovery of Possession, Mesne Profits, Adjournment, Set Off, Jurisdiction of Lands Tribunal, Review of Tribunal Decision
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Civil Procedure Property Law Tribunal Practice Recovery of Possession Mesne Profits Adjournment Set Off +2 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A18 Limited

1st Applicant/landlord

Star China Investment Limited

2nd Applicant/landlord

Respondent

Respondent/tenant

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant Recovery of Possession and Rent Arrears / Decision on Review of Tribunal Orders (post Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's absence and medical note justified an adjournment
  2. 2 Whether a related District Court action for set-off prevents the Lands Tribunal proceeding
  3. 3 Whether the respondent proved payments or an agreement to pay by instalments

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to refuse adjournment because sickness alone did not justify delay and the corporate respondent should have authorised representation; a related District Court action did not prevent the Lands Tribunal from proceeding on rent and possession claims; applicants proved arrears and deposited funds did not discharge ongoing rent from 1 February 2016; therefore original orders for possession, mesne profits and costs were correctly made and the review disclosed no new material to disturb those orders.

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed; original orders upheld.

Orders

  • Respondent to deliver vacant possession of Flat 18 (No 8 Man Wui Street) to 1st applicant A18 Limited
  • Respondent to pay 1st applicant arrears of rent/mesne profits at the rate of $15,000 per month from 1 February 2016 until delivery of vacant possession