CHEUNG SAU KUEN v. THE BUILDING AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER

CHEUNG SAU KUEN v. THE BUILDING AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER

The court held the Appeal Tribunal and Building Authority acted within their statutory discretion under the Buildings Ordinance; no legitimate expectation or issue estoppel arose that required an inquiry; the decision to dismiss on the papers and the reasons given were adequate in context and not Wednesbury unreasonable or ultra vires, therefore the applications for judicial review were dismissed.

Citation
CHEUNG SAU KUEN 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
HCMP772/1990
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Hearing on Applications for Leave for Judicial Review
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 Building Law Public Law 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 8 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 / Judgment After Hearing on Applications for Leave for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appeal Tribunal lawfully refused to hold inquiries and dismissed appeals on the papers
  2. 2 Whether the Building Authority was entitled to reissue demolition orders
  3. 3 Whether applicants had a legitimate expectation of an oral inquiry

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the Appeal Tribunal and Building Authority acted within their statutory discretion under the Buildings Ordinance; no legitimate expectation or issue estoppel arose that required an inquiry; the decision to dismiss on the papers and the reasons given were adequate in context and not Wednesbury unreasonable or ultra vires, therefore the applications for judicial review were dismissed.

Court Disposition

All applications for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Applications for judicial review dismissed
  • Costs reserved and parties to be heard on costs