TAKEARN INVESTMENT LTD v. THE BUILDING AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER

TAKEARN INVESTMENT LTD v. THE BUILDING AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER

The applications for judicial review were dismissed because the Building Authority and Appeal Tribunal acted within their statutory discretion under the Buildings Ordinance and its First Schedule; applicants failed to establish legitimate expectation or issue estoppel, the Tribunal was entitled to decide appeals on the papers if no good cause for inquiry shown, and the conduct did not constitute unlawful abuse of power or Wednesbury unreasonableness warranting interference.

Citation
TAKEARN INVESTMENT LTD v. THE BUILDING AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER
Parties
Applicant: Tsui Tim Sang; Applicant: Hui Sau Chun; Applicant: Cheung Ying Kow; Applicant: Choy Sook Ying; Applicant: Mok Sai Chow; Applicant: Yip Wai Ling; Applicant: Lai Shing Kok; Applicant: Takearn Investment Limited; Applicant: Cheung Sau Kuen; 1st Respondent: The Building Authority; 2nd Respondent: The Appeal Tribunal
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 December 1990
Case Number
HCMP771/1990
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Hearing and Judgment on Applications for Leave and Substantive Relief
Outcome
All applications for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Demolition Orders, Appeal Tribunal Procedure, Legitimate Expectation, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Issue Estoppel, Procedural Fairness, Statutory Discretion
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Public Law Building Regulation Judicial Review Demolition Orders Appeal Tribunal Procedure Legitimate Expectation Wednesbury Unreasonableness +3 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tsui Tim Sang

Applicant

Hui Sau Chun

Applicant

Cheung Ying Kow

Applicant

Choy Sook Ying

Applicant

Mok Sai Chow

Applicant

Yip Wai Ling

Applicant

Lai Shing Kok

Applicant

Takearn Investment Limited

Applicant

Cheung Sau Kuen

Applicant

The Building Authority

1st Respondent

The Appeal Tribunal

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Hearing and Judgment on Applications for Leave and Substantive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appeal Tribunal erred in refusing to hold an inquiry and dismissing appeals on the papers
  2. 2 Whether the Building Authority lawfully re-issued demolition orders after earlier proceedings
  3. 3 Whether applicants had a legitimate expectation or issue estoppel preventing further proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The applications for judicial review were dismissed because the Building Authority and Appeal Tribunal acted within their statutory discretion under the Buildings Ordinance and its First Schedule; applicants failed to establish legitimate expectation or issue estoppel, the Tribunal was entitled to decide appeals on the papers if no good cause for inquiry shown, and the conduct did not constitute unlawful abuse of power or Wednesbury unreasonableness warranting interference.

Court Disposition

All applications for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Applications for judicial review dismissed
  • Costs to be determined after hearing