|
LDBM 76/2019
[2024] HKLdT 67
IN THE LANDS TRIBUNAL OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
BUILDING MANAGEMENT APPLICATION NO.76 OF 2019
___________________
BETWEEN
|
|
THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HUNG WAI BUILDING
(鴻威大廈業主立案法團)
|
Applicant
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
SUNNY ELEGANT LIMITED
(旭彩有限公司)
|
1
st
Respondent
|
|
|
YU CHUNG MAN (余鐘文)
|
2
nd
Respondent
|
|
|
TASTY CREATION LIMITED
(創鮮有限公司) trading as
海中寶海鮮舫
|
3
rd
Respondent
|
|
|
MAK CREATIVE LIMITED
trading as AMPLIFIER RESTAURANT
|
4
th
Respondent
|
___________________
|
Before:
|
Deputy District Judge S. H. Lee, Presiding Officer of the Lands Tribunal, in Court
|
|
Date of Hearing :
|
7 August 2024
|
|
Date of Decision:
|
13 August 2024
|
_____________________
D E C I S I O N
_____________________
1.
This Decision deals with 2 summonses filed by the 4 respondents (
4 Rs
) arising from my Judgment handed down on 6 June 2024 after trial of this application and counterclaim (
the Judgment
)
[1]
. The same expressions and abbreviations in the Judgment are adopted in this Decision.
2.
The first summons filed on 3 July 2024 is an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal (
the Leave Application
). The proposed grounds of appeal are set out in 7
th
Affirmation of Wong Kam Mun filed on the even date (
7
th
Affirmation
).
3.
The second summons filed also on 3 July 2024 is an application for stay of execution of the Judgment pending appeal (
the Stay Application
). It was supported by 6
th
Affirmation of Wong Kam Mun filed on the even date (
6
th
Affirmation
).
4.
Ms Vivian Li of counsel (
Ms Li
) appeared on behalf of 4 Rs on both summonses before this Tribunal.
5.
Ms Becky Wong of counsel (
Ms Wong
) appearing for IO opposed both summonses. In the event the Stay Applicatin is allowed, Ms Wong asked that suitable conditions be imposed by this Tribunal.
Discussion
Overview of the Judgment
6.
The 5 parties to this application litigated over two groups of areas of the Building set out in section C1 of the Judgment: -
(1) 1/F level of the
External Wall
facing West; and
(2)
the Disputed Areas
on its G/F and 1/F levels, consisting of a) the Entrance Space, b) the Staircases, c) the Stair Landing, d) the Corridor, and e) the Toilets as defined in the Judgment
.
7.
As I found in the Judgment, at all material times, R3 and R4 (tenants of R2) carries on their respective businesses of the Chinese Restaurant and the Caf
|