Courage Investments Ltd and Another v. Go Sin Li Alias Wu Shen Li and Others

Read the full judgment text of LDCS 17000/2020 on BabelCite. This LDCS judgment was delivered on 21 December 2021.

1.  Please note the following corrigenda in the Judgment dated 21 December 2021: -

Cites 1 case

Case No.LDCS 17000/2020
Court
LDCS
Date21 Dec 2021
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

LDCS 17000/2020

[2021] HKLdT 78

IN THE LANDS TRIBUNAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

LAND COMPULSORY SALE MAIN APPLICATION NO 17000 OF 2020

__________________________

BETWEEN    
  COURAGE INVESTMENTS LIMITED 1st Applicant
  CENTURY ISLAND HOLDINGS LIMITED
(釆天控股有限公司)
2nd Applicant
  and
  GO SIN LI (吳信理) alias WU SHEN LI (吳盛利) 1st Respondent
  CHAN WANG KIN (陳宏健) and
CHAN HING CHEUNG (陳慶祥)
2nd Respondents
(discontinued)
  The Personal Representatives of LAW CHUN TAK, deceased
(死者羅進德的遺產代理人)
3rd Respondent
  NG CHI HING 4th Respondent

__________________________

Before:  Mr Lawrence Pang, Member of the Lands Tribunal

Dates of Hearing: 7 October 2021

Date of Judgment: 21 December 2021

Date of Corrigenda: 30 December 2021

____________________

C O R R I G E N D U M

____________________

1.  Please note the following corrigenda in the Judgment dated 21 December 2021: -

2.  At Paragraph 59, “…land value of the Lots at $363,000,000 (ie an accommodation value of $140,106/m2)” should read “…land value of the Lots at $350,000,000 (ie an accommodation value of $135,088/m2)”.

3.  At Paragraph 60, “…a land value of the Lots at $368,000,000 (ie the accommodation value $142,036/m2)” should read “…a land value of the Lots at $355,000,000 (ie the accommodation value $137,018/m2)”

4.  At Paragraph 61, “…reserve price of the Lots at $368,000,000 (which is equivalent to $142,036/m2)” should read “…reserve price of the Lots at $355,000,000 (which is equivalent to $137,018/m2)”

5.  At Paragraph 64(4)(ii), “…reserve price be set at $368,000,000” should read “…reserve price be set at $355,000,000.”

6.  At Paragraph 64(4)(iv), “…informing the 1st respondent and all persons claiming…” should read “…informing the 1st and 3rd respondent and all persons claiming…”.

7.  At page 33, the table of Appendix 1 should be replaced as follow:

Appendix 1
Residual Valuation
 
Gross Development Value
G/F Retail 128.50 m2 x $511,300 / m2 = $65,702,050
Residential Flat  1,658.15 m2 x $324,600 / m2 = $538,235,490
Flat Roof on 3/F       40.00 m2 x $47,465 / m2 = $1,898,600
Top Roof       60.00 m2 x $52,500 / m2 = $3,150,000
$608,986,140
Less Marketing Costs @ 3% 0.97
$590,716,556
Present Value in 2.5 years @ 4% 0.9066
$535,543,630
Development Costs
Demolition Cost  1,100.00 m2 x $2,200 / m2 = $2,420,000
Professional Fee @ 6% 1.06
Developer's Profit @ 12.5% 1.125
$2,885,850
Present Value in 0.25 year @ 4% 0.9902
$2,857,569
Construction Costs $110,289,538
Professional Fee @ 6% 1.06
Developer's Profit @ 12.5% 1.125
$131,520,274
Present Value in 1.5 years @ 4% 0.9429
$124,010,466
$408,675,595
Stamp Duty @ 4.25%
Legal Cost @ 0.10%
Developer's Profit @ 12.5% ÷ 1.16850
$349,743,770
say $350,000,000
Accommodation Value $135,088.19

Dated this 30th day of December 2021

  (Ms Iris YEUNG)
    Clerk to Member Lawrence Pang