25 Oct 2024
嘉信大廈業主立案法團 v. 張笑媚
- Citation
- [2024] HKLdT 87
- Court
- Lands Tribunal
- Case number
- LDMP6/2023
The Tribunal concluded there was admissible, compelling circumstantial and direct evidence from which no reasonable tribunal could fail to infer that the respondent had possession, custody or control of IO’s properties during the relevant period and wilfully refused to comply with the Previous Judgment; the criminal standard was correctly applied; there was no error of law in the reasoning; and the one‑month custodial sentence was within proper principle and proportion given contumacious, intentional breach and absence of mitigation, so leave to appeal lacked reasonable prospect of success.