BabelCite

Profit Success Development Ltd v. Appeal Tribunal (Buildings)

Read the full judgment text of HCAL 94/2011 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 8 November 2012.

(1) Both Structures 1 and 2 are not “building works” as defined under the BO, but are plant, machinery or equipment (under regulation 17(2)(e)(i) of the Building Regulations Building (Construction) Regulations, Cap.123B (“the Regulations”)).  They therefore do not fall within the purview of the BA.  I would call this the “building works ground”.

Case No.HCAL 94/2011
Court
High Court CFI
Date08 Nov 2012
Judge—
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCAL94/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 94 OF 2011

_______________

BETWEEN

  PROFIT SUCCESS DEVELOPMENT LIMITED Applicant
and
  APPEAL TRIBUNAL (BUILDINGS) Respondent
  BUILDING AUTHORITY Interested Party

_______________

Before : Hon Au J in Court

Date of Hearing : 28 August 2012

Date of Judgment : 8 November 2012

____________________

2nd CORRIGENDUM

____________________

Paragraph 19 (1) of the judgment should read as follows:

(1)Both Structures 1 and 2 are not “building works” as defined under the BO, but are plant, machinery or equipment (under regulation 17(2)(e)(i) of the Building Regulations Building (Construction) Regulations, Cap.123B (“the Regulations”)).  They therefore do not fall within the purview of the BA.  I would call this the “building works ground”.

(C.F. Tam)
Clerk to the Honourable Mr. Justice Au
Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 94/2011

Profit Success Development Ltd v. Appeal Tribunal (Buildings) and Another
High Court CFI08 Nov 2012
Profit Success Development Ltd v. Appeal Tribunal (Buildings)
High Court CFI08 Nov 2012