{
  "Date": "5 Sep, 2002",
  "Action No.": "LDBM54/2002",
  "Neutral Cit.": "[2002] HKLDT 156",
  "case_title": "CHAN YIP KEUNG AND ANOTHER 訴 THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF BELVEDERE GARDEN PHASE II AND ANOTHER",
  "page_title": "CHAN YIP KEUNG AND ANOTHER 訴 THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF BELVEDERE GARDEN PHASE II AND ANOTHER | [2002] HKLDT 156 | HKLII",
  "case_history": [
    {
      "name": "LDBM54/2002",
      "link": "https://www.hklii.hk/tc/appealhistory/LDBM/2002/54"
    }
  ],
  "appeal_history": [],
  "case_url": "https://www.hklii.hk/tc/cases/hkldt/2002/156",
  "neutral_cit": "[2002] HKLDT 156",
  "court_code": "HKLDT",
  "content": "LDBM000054B/2002 Chan Yip Keung and Another 訴 The Incorporated Owners of Belvedere Garden Phase II and Another\nLDBM000054B/2002\nLDBM 54 OF 2002\n香港特別行政區\n土地審裁處\n建築物管理申請編號2002年第54號\nChan Yip Keung and Leung Shiu Kuen\n申請人\n對\nThe Incorporated Owners of Belvedere Garden Phase II\n第一答辯人\nChiang Shu To (蔣書濤)\n第二答辯人\n主審法官：周兆熊法官\n宣判日期：2002年9月5日\n______________\n判 決 書\n______________\n1.\n2002年7月10日，本席頒令將針對第二答辯人的所有申請剔除，並命令就該傳票申請涉及的訟費的爭議，由助理司法常務官另訂 日期聆訊。助理司法常務官將聆訊日期定於2002年8月26日；在該日期進行的聆訊是申請人與第二答辯人法律程序的終結。\n2．\n2002年8月26日，本席審理訟費的爭議。代表第二答辯人的Maurice Ng大律師要求本席判令申請人支付第二答辯人上述申請的訟費，但該訟費須按彌償基準而予以評定。他引用下述載於\nHong Kong Civil Procedure 2002\n年版第1冊第896頁的案例以支持其說法 ：\n\"The Court of Appeal in Choy Yee Chun (The representative of the estate of Chan Pui Yiu) v. Bond Star Development Ltd [H. K. L. R. D.] 1327 reviewed the cases and summarized the law as follows. A taxation of the successful party's costs on an indemnity basis could properly be ordered where the proceedings were scandalous or vexatious, or had been initiated or prosecuted maliciously, or for an ulterior motive, or in an oppressive manner.\"\n3．\n上述案例的裁決是否適用於本案？這要視乎申請通知書披露的事實以及所有有關的証據。申請通知書披露下列與第二答辯人有關的事實 ：\n\"9. On 27th February 2002, a total of 160 letters, representing 5% of ownership in the Building, duly signed by each owner thereof, were submitted to the 2nd Respondent, as the then chairman of the 3rd Management Committee, personally whereby a request was duly made to him to convene a general meeting of the Owners Incorporated for the purpose of electing a new 4th Management Committee;\n10. On 13th March 2002, the 2nd Respondent tendered his resignation both as chairman and ordinary member of the 3rd Management Committee;\n11. Up to the date hereof, neither the 1st Respondent nor any of the remaining members of the 3rd Management Committee make any response to the request mentioned in paragraph 9 above.\"\n4．\n本席將申請人針對第二答辯人的申請剔除，因為該申請並無法律和事實的基礎作為申請的根據。簡單來說，該申請並無披露合理的訴因，故此它須被剔除。\n5．\n第二答辯人提出一份日期為2002年5月13日的誓章；在這份誓章中，他指出Chan Yip Keung缺乏提出本案申請的法律地位。\n6．\n本案所有針對第二答辯人的事實和証據，並不具有Choy Yee Chun一案所述明的因素，因此以彌償基準作為計算申請人支付第二答辯人訟費的基礎是不適當的。\n7.\n2002年6月17日，申請人（Chan Yip Keung）提出再修訂申請通知書的申請。本席在2002年6月21日審理該申請。Maurice Ng大律師反對是項申請，因為他認為申請人在該階段提出該申請是不適當 的。經聆訊雙方的陳詞後，本席批准是項申請，故此第二答辯人須支付申請人該申請聆訊的訟費。\n8.\n本席頒佈下述的命令 ：\n1. 申請人（Chan Yip Keung）須支付予第二答辯人於2002年6月21日再修訂申請通知書而引致產生的訟費（如有的 話），但第二答辯人須支付予申請人（Chan Yip Keung）該申請聆訊的訟費（包括聘用大律師的費用）；\n2. 兩名申請人須支付第二答辯人剔除申請聆訊的訟費（包括第二答辯人聘用大律師的費用）；\n3. 2002年8月26日的訟費聆訊 ：就有關訟費是否應以彌償基準作為評定訟費基礎的聆訊部份，第二答辯人須支付兩名申請人該部份的訟費（包括聘用大律師的費用），就餘下的聆訊部份，兩名申請人須支付第二答辯人該部份的訟費（包括聘用大律師的費用）；\n4. 兩名申請人須支付予第二答辯人原訴申請（Originating Application）的訟費；\n5. 如與訟雙方未能議定上述所有訟費的款額，則該等款額由法庭審定。\n周兆熊法官\n土地審裁處\n兩位申請人：由葉楊福蘭楊福祺律師行代表。\n第二答辯人：由李周彭陳律師行代表。",
  "attachments": [
    {
      "download_url": "https://legalref.judiciary.hk/doc/judg/word/vetted/other/ch/2002/LDBM000054B_2002.doc",
      "file_name": "LDBM000054B_2002.doc",
      "file_ext": ".doc",
      "status": "success"
    }
  ]
}