Oriental (China) Trading Limited v. The Occupants of Peng Chau Lot No. 204 and Others

HCMP 1321/2016

[2024] HKCFI 2712

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 1321 OF 2016

_________________

_________________

_________________

_______________

DECISION

_______________

1.I will transfer the case to the District Court[1]. All parties have confirmed that their respective claims and counterclaims are within the jurisdiction of that court.

2.For the plaintiff, it has confirmed today that it will waive any claim for damages which go over the threshold of $3,000,000. In any event, up to now they have not adduced any evidence on quantum in respect of their pleaded claim. Given the absence of such evidence, it is unlikely that they will get the damages as claimed in any event.

3.For the 2^nd defendant, his claim is for adverse possession of the land in question. Given the rateable value which has been checked by the solicitors, that claim is also within the jurisdiction of the District Court.

4.For the 3^rd, 4^th and 5^th defendants, they also make claims for adverse possession of their respective lands. Again, rateable values have been checked. That is within the jurisdiction of the District Court. And for 5^th defendant, there is a claim for damages. But counsel has confirmed today that it will only be asking for nominal damages.

5.So, on the whole, this case, including the action itself and also the counterclaims of the respective defendants, are within the jurisdiction of the District Court. Under section 43(3)[2], the court is required to transfer unless this is a case of importance or complexity or there is some other reason for not transferring.

6.In this case, of course, the matter was set down for trial about two years ago. However, one needs to take into account that the court’s resources should be made better use and proper use of.

7.I have made enquiries with the District Court listing clerk. The earliest trial date for a 10-day trial would be July next year. So there will be an 8-month delay in this case.

8.But, on balance, I consider that the case should be transferred and therefore I will make the following orders:

(1)  The action and the respective counterclaims of the 2^nd to 5^th defendants be transferred to the District Court pursuant to section 43 of the Ordinance;

(2)  The trial dates of 25 November to 6 December 2024 reserved for the action be vacated;

(3)  The trial in the District Court do commence on 14 July 2025 at 9:30 am, with 10 days reserved, namely 14 to 18 and 21 to 25 July 2025;

(4)  The parties do fix a date for a PTR hearing with the listing office of the District Court after the transfer. The PTR hearing do take place 8 to 12 weeks before the trial;

(5)  The scale of taxation for costs incurred prior to the transfer and the costs of the transfer be reserved and be determined by the trial judge;

(6)  Costs of today’s hearing be in the cause; and

(7)  The 4^th and 5^th defendants’ own costs of today’s hearing and the costs of the transfer be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations.

Mr Isaac Yung, instructed by CLY Lawyers, for the plaintiff

Ms Lorinda Lau, instructed by H.Y. Leung & Co. LLP, for the 2^nd defendant

Mr Billy NP Ma, instructed by T.C. Lau & Company, for the 3^rd defendant

Mr Billy NP Ma, instructed by T.C. Lau & Company, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the 4^th and 5^th defendants