Case Document

100%Judiciary

LDBM000273/2000

IN THE LANDS TRIBUNAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

BUILDING MANAGEMENT APPLICATION

Application No. LDBM 273 of 2000

_________________

	The Incorporated Owners of Blocks F1 to F7 of Pearl Island Holiday Flats	Applicant

	AND

	Fullwill Property Management Ltd.	Respondent

Coram: H.H. Judge LAM

Date of Hearing: 16 August 2001

Date of Ruling: 16 August 2001

--------------------------

RULING ON COSTS

--------------------------

1.The issue which I have to decide regarding the balance sheet & income expenditure account is a narrow one, i.e. whether the documents produced by the Respondent were balance sheet & income & expenditure account as required by Para 8 of the Seventh Schedule of the Building Management Ordinance.

2.The Applicant said that the purported balance sheet at R130 is not a balance sheet because it does not set out the assets & liabilities in respect of the management account of the building. As to the income & expenditure accounts, it is said that instead of one account for the whole period, the Respondent has produced several accounts, each for a different period, although if they are read together , they covered the whole period during which the Respondent was managing the building.

3.The Applicant wishes to call expert evidence on the matter. The Respondent said it is not necessary for expert evidence to be called.

4.The function of an expert witness is to explain words, or terms of science or art appearing on the documents which have to be construed by the Court, to give expert assistance to the court or to inform the Court as to the state of public knowledge with regard to the matters before it. (see Hong Kong Civil Procedure 2001, Para 38/4/2) See also the comments of Rogers JA in Lord Energy v Paul Chan [1998] 2 HKLRD 751 at P. 758-760 as to the limitation on expert evidence.

5.In the present context, in resolving the aforementioned issue, I am of the view that it is not necessary for me to have the assistance of an expert to decide whether the purported balance sheet set out the assets & liabilities position. Any judge can tell whether a document set out those matters without the assistance of an expert. Still less is it necessary for an expert to be called to decide whether the income & expenditure accounts should be contained in one document, that is purely a question of construction of the wordings in Para 8 of the Seventh Schedule.

6.It may be different if the issue is whether the documents produced by the Respondent have fully and adequately set out the financial state of affair regarding the management of the building by the Respondent. In fact, it seems to me that substantial part of the proposed evidence of the Applicant's expert was directed to that question . But this is not an issue before me. If the Applicant's case is that whilst balance sheet & income & expenditure accounts have been supplied by the Respondent, they were inadequate and the Applicant sought to vouch the accounts, the Applicant should commence an action for account and seek relief under O.43 RHC. That would not be a simple claim for production of documents pursuant to Para 8 of the Seventh Schedule and it is probably not within the purview of the present proceedings (although I am willing to hear further submissions on this point if the Applicant wishes to pursue the matter). According to the draft order produced by Mr. WEI, the Applicant is not seeking these relief and as it is, the issues are simple ones and I hold that expert evidence is not necessary and inadmissible.