Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Repair order

Legal area

Court

30 Jun 2025

CHUI MARJORIE CHE YING AND ANOTHER v. APPEAL TRIBUNAL (BUILDINGS) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 606
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV291/2022

The court refused leave to appeal out of time because the applicants exhibited significant and inexcusable delay, failed to show the intended appeal had a real prospect of success, and the issue was academic following repair of the pipe such that there was no sufficiently great public interest to justify granting out‑of‑time leave to the CFA.
21 Jul 2023

江海溥 v. 屋宇署署長 (建築事務監督)

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 882
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1521/2022

The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed because the Repair Order has been withdrawn and the Determination has in effect lapsed making the challenge academic, and in any event none of the intended grounds disclose arguable public law errors with a realistic prospect of success given the statutory appeal mechanism and the absence of prejudice or causal loss.
18 Nov 2022

張麗雯對呂劍華

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1310
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1792/2021

Amendment to add the repair-order claim was permitted because the defendant withdrew opposition and no irremediable prejudice was shown; however summary judgment for a mandatory injunction and repair order was refused because the originating process did not plead any continuing leak and the plaintiff's post‑pleading evidence of a 2022 recurrence could not be admitted on the present summary judgment basis; the plaintiff did present a plausible prima facie case that earlier leaks (2017, 2018, 2020) originated from the defendant's unit, but the defendant was granted conditional leave to defend t…
18 Nov 2022

張麗雯對呂劍華

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1310
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3536/2021

Amendment to add a repair order was permitted because the defendant withdrew opposition to amendment; no final injunction or repair order was granted on summary judgment because the statement of claim did not plead ongoing leakage and the plaintiff could not rely on unpleaded affidavit allegations; the plaintiff had shown a plausible prima facie case on the damages claim but the defendant was entitled to leave to defend subject to the condition that HK$200,000 be paid into court within 28 days, failing which judgment for damages would be entered and costs consequences specified.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHUI MARJORIE CHE YING AND ANOTHER v. APPEAL TRIBUNAL (BUILDINGS) AND ANOTHER

江海溥 v. 屋宇署署長 (建築事務監督)

張麗雯 對 呂劍華

張麗雯 對 呂劍華

張麗雯對呂劍華

張麗雯對呂劍華