Read the full judgment text of CACV 19/2012 and CACV 113/2012 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 15 March 2013 before Fok JA.
Civil procedure – joinder of party – O.15 r.6(2)(b) – second limb – Real Estate Developers Association of Hong Kong applying to be joined in two Court of Appeal proceedings – Dobrowen Appeal (CACV 19/2012) from HCAL 20/2011 and Case Stated Appeal (CACV 113/2012) by way of case stated under section 53C(1) of the Buildings Ordinance, Cap. 123 – both appeals concerning Building Authority's policy of requiring proof of ownership or realistic prospect of control over land for general building plan approval – REDA also applicant in pending judicial review HCAL 95/2011 raising same point of law – applications to have the two appeals heard together not pursued once Clerk of Appeals listed both before same bench of three judges – whether REDA comes within O.15 r.6(2)(b) for joinder – whether just and convenient to permit joinder – second limb of O.15 r.6(2)(b)(ii) requires some interest in would-be intervener directly related to subject matter of action – mere interest in a question of law common to pending litigation insufficient – Spelling Goldberg Productions Inc v BPC Publishing Ltd [1981] RPC 280 and Shanghai Land Holdings Ltd (in receivership) v Chau Ching Ngai [2005] 3 HKC 302 followed – Wing Mou Construction v Cosmic Insurance, HCCT 40/2001 considered – existing parties already represented by leading and junior counsel who are members of REDA – REDA did not seek to appear in underlying judicial review contrary to O.53 r.5B – unusual to permit non-appearing party to join at appeal stage in case stated appeal – stare decisis applies regardless of joinder so avoidance of multiplicity argument given limited weight – delay by REDA since leave for judicial review in November 2011 and proceedings dormant since March 2012 – joinder would risk time estimates on which appeals were fixed to prejudice of existing parties – O.59 r.8 and inherent jurisdiction add nothing to application – REDA's summonses dismissed with costs to follow the event – costs of first two summonses in the cause of the appeals.
Legal issues: Joinder of REDA under O.15 r.6(2)(b) of the Rules of the High Court · Discretion to permit joinder as just and convenient
Outcome: REDA's applications to be joined as a party in both CACV 19/2012 and CACV 113/2012 were dismissed. The applications to have the two appeals heard together were not pursued and the court made no order on them, the Clerk of Appeals having listed both appeals to be heard by the same bench of three judges.
Cites 4 cases