The Incorporated Owners of Block F1 To F7 of Pearl Island Holiday Flats 訴 I Cashmere Group Ltd and Others

LDBM000071/2003

LDBM 71/2003

香港特別行政區

土地審裁處

建築物管理申請編號2003年第71號

主審法官: 周兆熊法官

聆訊日期: 2003年8月5日

宣判日期: 2003年8月21日

_______________

判 案 書

_______________

1.申請人是屯門青龍路9號龍珠島別墅的業主立案法團，答辯人是在龍珠島別墅分別擁有不同單位、天台或花園的業主。本席祗需裁決申請人與第2、4、5、7、8、11至14答辯人之事。在聆訊之日（即2003年8月5日），第2、5、7、8、11至14答辯人沒有出席聆訊。

2.本席首先要裁決的是土地審裁處（“審裁處”）對申請人的申請是否具有司法管轄權。申請人的申請有以下的主要內容：－

' 4. On 27th November 2002 the Buildings Department issued two Building Orders .............................. which demand the Applicant to repair ..................

5. By a general meeting of owners of the said Building convened by the Applicant on 23rd March 2003, it was resolved that various parts of the common areas and common facilities and of the said Building should be maintained and repaired to the satisfactory of the Buildings Department. ................

6. In relation to the share of maintenance fee the said DMC contains the following express provision:-

................................

	Type of owner	Share of "the said premises" and "the said Building"
1.	Residential Unit	244 x 2 = 448
2.	Roofs	7 x 2 = 14
3.	South-eastern garden	12
		________
	Total:	474 share ________

"(4) The owner or owners for the time being of each two undivided 474th parts or shares in the said premises and building shall at all times hereafter be bound by and shall observe and perform the covenants and restrictions set out in the Second Schedule hereto."

" The Second Schedule Above Referred to

Covenants, provisions and restrictions referred to in Clause 4 of this Deed.

1. To pay the due proportion hereinafter mentioned of a costs, charges and expenses which may be or become payable for or in connection with the Management of the said building in accordance with the provisions of Clause (7)(ii)(c) and (d) of this Deed including but not limited to:-

(h) The cost of repairing, renewing, maintaining, cleansing, painting, or decorating the said building .............

........................

2. The proportion of the costs, charges and expenses which each owner shall be liable to pay hereunder shall be 1/224th share for every residential unit in the said building of which he is the owner.

........................"

10. The provision of the said DMC is not entire certain whether or not the owners of the roofs and/or the South Eastern Garden is required to pay the Maintenance Fee. Or what contribution is required to pay.

11. Under Cap.334 of BMO Section 22, in absence of provision of Deed of Mutual Covenant the owners shall share the expenses in according with their respective shares. If there is no deed of mutual covenant, or if the deed of mutual covenant does not provide for the fixing of contributions, the amount to be contributed by an owner towards the amount determined under section 21 shall be fixed by the management committee in accordance with the respective shares of the owners.

12. In or about March, the Applicant received demand from some of the Respondents to require interpretation of question of the law in this regard.

13. Upon joint application of the Applicant and the Respondents, it is herein apply to this tribunal:-

a. to determine whether or not the owners of the roofs and the owners of the South-Eastern Garden shall be liable to pay the maintenance fee;

b. to determine the proportion of the share each owner shall pay;

c. to determine whether or not Cap.344 of BMO s.22 shall apply;

d. to grant any order or declaration as this tribunal think fit;

e. no order as to cost.'

3.申請人的申請是根據《建築物管理條例》（“條例”）附表10第2、8及9段提出的。以下是附表10與本案有關的部份：－

" 1. 與本條例條文的釋義及執行有關的法律程序。

2. 與公契條款及條文（包括根據第VI A部隱含地納入公契的條款或條文）的釋義及執行有關的法律程序。.......

........................

7. 在不提損害第6段及在第45（3）條的規限下，與涉及業主式佔用人所享有的任何合約上的權利或所有權權利，或另於土地註冊處註冊的文書包括公契（如有的話）的條款及條文所提述的任何合約上的權利或所有權權利的範圍及適用性或其他方面的法律問題的法律程序。

8. 與涉及違反或指稱違反該土地註冊處註冊的文書包括公契（如有的話）的任何契諾、條款或條件的法律問題有關的法律程序。

9. 與第7段所提述的任何合約上的權利式所有權權利或第8段所提述的任何契諾、條款或條件（視屬何情況而定）的執行（不論以強制履行令、強制令、聲明、損害賠償或其他方式執行）有關的法律程序。”

（原文無底線）

4.申請人的申請實質上是要求審裁處就大厦公契條款以及條例第22條作出釋義。申請通知書第12段清楚顯示這一點。申請通知書並無任何一部份是有關公契條款或條例第22條的執行之事。附表10的第1段及第2段因此不適用於本案。申請通知書亦無關於答辯人違反公契條文的指稱，或任何權利的執行，因此附表10第8及第9段不適用於本案。

5.申請人的申請不屬於附表10的範圍，因此審裁處對該申請無司法管轄權。基於上述的理由，本席將申請人的申請撤銷。

訟費

6.本席頒下臨時訟費命令：申請人須支付第4答辯人本案的訟費。如與訟雙方未能議定訟費的款額，該款額由法庭按區域法院訟費水平為基準而予以評定。申請人不須支付訟費予第2、5、7、8、11至14答辯人。如在21天內與訟任何一方不向本席提出申請，上述的臨時命令作實。

申請人：由M/S Cheng & Pan 律師事務所代表。

第2、4、5、7、8、11至14答辯人：缺席。