Chu Pak Hei v. Lau Tim Fat and Others

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 1117/2004 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 30 August 2006.

1. The applicant applied to be joined as a defendant.  He claimed to be the subtenant of the principal tenant, the 3 rd defendant herein.  However, on 22 March 2006, Deputy Judge Muttrie had already entered judgment for the plaintiffs, being the registered owner of the suit property, against the 3 rd defendant.

Appeal dismissed: see CACV335/2006 dated 6 March 2007
Case No.HCMP 1117/2004
Court
High Court CFI
Date30 Aug 2006
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP1117/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1117 OF 2004

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

  IN THE MATTER OF Order 113 of the Rules of the High Court and other matters
  and
  IN THE MATTER OF the parcel of ground registered in the Tsuen Wan New Territories Land Registry as Lot 19-28 DD 455

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

BETWEEN

  CHU PAK HEI Applicant
  and  
  LAU TIM FAT 1st Plaintiff
  LAU TIM YAU 2nd Plaintiff
  LAU TIM CHOI 3rd Plaintiff
  LAU MAN KIT 4th Plaintiff
  LAU TAK HUNG 5th Plaintiff
  LAU HON KEUNG 6th Plaintiff
  LAU WING MAN 7th Plaintiff
  LAU WING CHUNG, PAUL 8th Plaintiff
  LAU SHU WAN 9th Plaintiff
  LAU SHUE TAN 10th Plaintiff
  LAU FUK PING 11th Plaintiff
  LAU FUK SHEUNG, MONDY 12th Plaintiff
  LAU FUK SANG 13th Plaintiff
  LAU FUK HONG 14th Plaintiff
  and  
  LI BANG-YUEN 1st Defendant
  LI BANG-YU 2nd Defendant
  (whose names are known)  
  LAM KWOK WAI 3rd Defendant

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

Before : Hon Yam J in Chambers

Date of Hearing : 30 August 2006

Date of Judgment : 30 August 2006

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

JUDGMENT

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

1.The applicant applied to be joined as a defendant.  He claimed to be the subtenant of the principal tenant, the 3rd defendant herein.  However, on 22 March 2006, Deputy Judge Muttrie had already entered judgment for the plaintiffs, being the registered owner of the suit property, against the 3rd defendant.

2.Thus even if the applicant is the subtenant of the 3rd defendant, the applicant’s interest, as he claimed, in part of the property had already been terminated by reason of the termination of the head lease.  In fact, Deputy Judge Muttrie made a declaration that the head tenancy was null and void and of no effect at all times.

3.The applicant’s counsel submitted before me that that decision of Deputy Judge Muttrie is on appeal and if Deputy Judge Muttrie’s decision is reversed, then the applicant can be said to be an interested party in the action.

4.That, in my view, cannot be a ground of reversing the decision of Master Ho.  The judgment entered had already terminated the head tenancy.  Accordingly, the applicant has no basis in this application to be joined as a party herein.  This appeal against Master Ho’s decision must be dismissed, with costs to the plaintiffs.

5.The costs of today’s hearing is assessed summarily at $30,000.00 to be paid by the applicant to the plaintiffs within 14 days hereof.

  (D. Yam)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Mr Daniel Tang, instructed by Messrs C.W. Lau & Co., for the Applicant

Mr Jonathan Chang, instructed by Messrs Rowland Chow, Chan & Co., for the 1st to 14th Plaintiffs

The 3rd Defendant, absent

Appeal dismissed: see CACV335/2006 dated 6 March 2007