LDBM 138/2021

[2025] HKLdT 54

IN THE LANDS TRIBUNAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

BUILDING MANAGEMENT APPLICATION NO 138 OF 2021

__________________________

BETWEEN

__________________________

________________

D E C I S I O N

________________

1. By summons dated 6 May 2025 (“Summons”), the Applicant (“IO”) seeks leave to appeal against my judgment dated 8 April 2025 (“Judgment”) dismissing the IO’s claim.

2. I determined that it was appropriate to deal with the application for leave to appeal on paper and gave directions to that end. The IO lodged and served Submissions For the Applicant/ Appellant dated 26 May 20205 (“IO’s Subs”) and Reply Submission For the Applicant/IO dated 23 June 2025 (“IO’s Reply”) of trial counsel Mr Lewis Law and Mr Steve Cheung. The Respondents lodged and served Submissions For The Respondents dated 9 June 2025 (“Respondents’ Subs”) of trial counsel Mr Bernard Man SC and Mr Harrison Miao.

3. The facts are set out in the Judgment. I shall not repeat them here. I adopt the abbreviations used in the Judgment unless otherwise stated. The case concerns a large advertising sign that has been displayed on the 1/F external walls of the Building since the 1950s.

4. Significant for the purposes of the draft Grounds of Appeal is that:

(1) The IO’s claim was for, inter alia, injunctions to compel the Respondents to reinstate the walls and restrain them from erecting further signage without authorisation, declarations and mesne profits for unauthorised use of the external walls of the Building for the A Sign from 12 December 2018. The Notice of Application (“NOA”) prayer is set out at the Judgment §51.

(2) The pleaded defences were acquiescence, laches, proprietary estoppel and lost modern grant. The Respondents did not make any counterclaim or seek any declarations.

(3) There were signs at different positions on the external walls of the Building. The signage was identified by a letter, “A” to “C” according to the position of a sign on the walls and a number: Judgment §15. The actual sign at a given position changed or was replaced from time to time over the years but the letter designation remains the same. The sign in issue is an A Sign on 1/F level of the external walls. All signs in that position throughout the years are referred to as the A Signs. The C Signs included the Longines C4 Sign, which was at a different position on the walls to that of the A Signs.

(4) Attached to the Judgment is a photograph of the Sign, identified as A-16, which was taken in or about August 2021 (“the A Sign”). The photograph also shows a much smaller sign, C-5 Sign which succeeded the Longines C-4 Sign: Judgment §272.

(5) The parties reached common ground that (1) the pre-2018 A Signs