Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Reserve price assessment

Legal area

Court

24 Feb 2023

LUCK MOST LTD AND OTHERS v. GOOD MOVEMENT LTD

Citation

[2023] HKLdT 14
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS11000/2020

The Tribunal interpreted Schedule 2 paragraph 2 as requiring the reserve price to be fixed by reference to the redevelopment potential of the subject lot(s) on their own, thereby excluding evidence and claims relying on merged site or special interest (Clay) factors for the purpose of fixing the reserve price; paragraph 1(b) (and annexed plan and schedule) disclosed no arguable defence on that point and was struck out; the provision was not unconstitutional in that scheme and the auction process protects minority owners by allowing market realization of any enhanced value.
13 Jan 2017

FIRST KIND LTD v. YUET LOONG INVESTMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

FIRST KIND LTD v. YUET LOONG INVESTMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS14000/2014

The Tribunal held it has a limited discretion under s.4(6)(a)(i) to order combined sales or combinations but cannot set a reserve price on a merged site basis beyond the lots comprised in each individual application; a consenting or non‑participating party who agreed to abide by the Tribunal is estopped from seeking leave to appeal (R1 in CS‑13 dismissed); leave to appeal was granted to other participating respondents because the questions of law have reasonable prospects and public importance; the costs order nisi was made absolute with specified apportionments and taxation directions.
13 Jan 2017

FIRST KIND LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHOI FEI MAN RONNIE AND ANOTHER

Citation

FIRST KIND LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHOI FEI MAN RONNIE AND ANOTHER
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS13000/2014

The Tribunal held that (a) it has a discretionary power under s.4(6)(a)(i) to direct synchronized or joint sales but cannot make an order whose subject‑matter extends beyond the lots specified in each original application; accordingly reserve prices must be set in respect of each application and the final reserve for a combined auction will be the aggregate of the individual reserves; (b) R1 in CS‑13 is estopped from seeking leave to appeal because he had consented to be bound and taken no part in proceedings (issue estoppel); (c) leave to appeal was granted to the other participating respond…
13 Jan 2017

FIRST KIND LTD v. UNION ESSENCE INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

FIRST KIND LTD v. UNION ESSENCE INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS20000/2014

R1 in CS-13 was refused leave to appeal because having previously indicated he would abide by the Tribunal's decision and not participated he was bound by that stance and caught by res judicata/issue estoppel; leave to appeal was granted to the other participating minority respondents because their grounds raised arguable points of law, conflicting Tribunal authorities existed and the questions (construction of LCSRO provisions and reserve price treatment for combined sales) raised issues of public importance and a reasonable prospect of success; costs order nisi previously made was made abso…
13 Jan 2017

FIRST KIND LTD v. WONG SHEK AND OTHERS

Citation

FIRST KIND LTD v. WONG SHEK AND OTHERS
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS15000/2014

R1 in LDCS13000/2014 was estopped from seeking leave to appeal because he had agreed to abide by the Tribunal's decision and failed to participate; leave to appeal was granted to the other participating respondents on the specified legal questions because their applications met the statutory 'reasonable prospect of success' or interests of justice test; the Tribunal holds it has a discretion under s.4(6)(a)(i) to direct combined sales but, by construction of relevant LCSRO provisions, any sale order and the reserve price must be confined to the lots within each original application (the reser…
13 Jan 2017

FIRST KIND LTD AND ANOTHER v. LIU KENG CHOR, THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF LI FUNG MAN DECEASED AND ANOTHER

Citation

FIRST KIND LTD AND ANOTHER v. LIU KENG CHOR, THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF LI FUNG MAN DECEASED AND ANOTHER
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS12000/2014

The Tribunal held it has a discretion under s.4(6)(a)(i) to direct combined sale or synchronization but cannot set a reserve price on a merged site basis beyond the lots in each original application; R1 in CS-13 who agreed to abide by the Tribunal's decision was estopped from seeking leave to appeal; leave to appeal was granted to other participating respondents because their appeals had reasonable prospects or raised matters of public importance; the costs order nisi was made absolute applying the compensation approach to costs.
13 Jan 2017

FIRST KIND LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG FU CHEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

FIRST KIND LTD AND ANOTHER v. WONG FU CHEUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS21000/2014

The Tribunal dismissed R1 in CS-13's leave application on issue estoppel/res judicata grounds because R1 had consciously elected to abide by the Tribunal's decision and not participate; the Tribunal granted leave to appeal to the other respondents because their grounds raised arguable points of law with reasonable prospects and public importance under s.11AA(6) LTO; substantively the Tribunal held it only had discretion under s.4(6)(a)(i) to direct combined sale, and reserve price must be restricted to lots comprised in each original application (aggregate reserve for auction will be sum of i…
6 Sept 2013

DAY BRIGHT DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS v.THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF WONGBING (DECEASED）AND OTHERS

Citation

DAY BRIGHT DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS v.THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF WONGBING (DECEASED）AND OTHERS<br>
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDCS16000/2012

Applicants met the statutory ownership threshold (applicable reduced threshold 80%), credible expert evidence established the Building is aged and in a state beyond reasonable economic repair so redevelopment is justified, the EUV and RDV valuations by Savills were accepted as fair and reasonable and the applicants had taken reasonable steps to acquire outstanding shares; therefore an order for compulsory sale by public auction with reserve price HK$163,000,000 and appointment of the proposed trustees was justified.