Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Consolidation and stays

Legal area

Court

3 Dec 2008

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION

Citation

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDRA364/2002

The application for review was refused because (1) the Tribunal's 3 November case management decision selecting a single test appeal and staying other appeals was a valid exercise of case management discretion; (2) the applicant failed to demonstrate cogent and overriding new factors that would justify revisiting that decision; and (3) the respondent is entitled to be heard at the first-stage review, so the procedural prerequisites for an immediate ex parte reversal were not met.
3 Dec 2008

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION

Citation

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDRA507/2001

The Tribunal must make the initial s.11A review threshold decision within one month and that decision ordinarily requires hearing both parties; the applicant's newly advanced factors (possible refunds from WACC change and a separate 2008 appeal) did not constitute cogent or overriding reasons to revisit the well-founded case management decision of 3 November 2008 to select a single test appeal and stay the others, particularly given the applicant's prior agreement to stays and available remedies (High Court restitution action); accordingly the review application was refused and the original c…
3 Dec 2008

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION

Citation

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDRA504/2001

The Tribunal refused the review because section 11A requires a two-stage process with a hearing entitlement at the first stage except in clear ex parte cases; the respondent must be heard; the applicant failed to show sufficiently cogent and overriding new circumstances (possible refunds due to WACC increase or a new 2008 appeal) to justify revisiting the November 3 case management decision selecting a test appeal and maintaining stays; accordingly the review application was dismissed.
3 Dec 2008

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION

Citation

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDRA542/1999

The Tribunal held that s11A establishes a two-stage review procedure and, absent clearly established exceptions, parties are entitled to be heard at the first stage; on the facts the applicant failed to demonstrate cogent and overriding reasons to reopen the Tribunal's 3 November 2008 case management decision selecting a single test appeal, so the application for review was refused and the original case management orders were maintained.

Hong Kong Case Law

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION

CLP POWER HONG KONG LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF RATING AND VALUATION