GOLDEN BEST INVESTMENT LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

GOLDEN BEST INVESTMENT LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

The Court held the deputy adjudicator's factual findings were within the range of reasonable conclusions: the Building Authority had statutory authority to carry out and apportion emergency repair costs; the posting of the s.33 Certificate on the incorporated owners' notice board constituted effective service under the Buildings Ordinance and, on the totality of evidence admissible in Small Claims proceedings, the Claimant failed to rebut service; the adjudicator properly exercised the duty to inquire; and there was no proven bias. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Citation
GOLDEN BEST INVESTMENT LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
Parties
Claimant (appellant): GOLDEN BEST INVESTMENT LIMITED; Defendant (respondent): SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 May 2016
Case Number
HCSA39/2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal (court of First Instance) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs to the Defendant
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Interest on Statutory Charge, Recovery of Repair Costs, Duty to Inquire, Appeal on Question of Law, Bias
Source Language
EN
Building Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Tribunal Procedure Service of Process Interest on Statutory Charge Recovery of Repair Costs Duty to Inquire +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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GOLDEN BEST INVESTMENT LIMITED

Claimant (appellant)

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal (court of First Instance) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Building Authority's repair costs were excessive or unreasonable
  2. 2 Whether the s.33 Certificate was duly served on the Claimant (service by registered post and/or posting)
  3. 3 Whether interest charged under s.33(4) was overcharged

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the deputy adjudicator's factual findings were within the range of reasonable conclusions: the Building Authority had statutory authority to carry out and apportion emergency repair costs; the posting of the s.33 Certificate on the incorporated owners' notice board constituted effective service under the Buildings Ordinance and, on the totality of evidence admissible in Small Claims proceedings, the Claimant failed to rebut service; the adjudicator properly exercised the duty to inquire; and there was no proven bias. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs to the Defendant

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to the Defendant (Secretary for Justice)