Supremacy Trading Co Ltd v. Asian Property Investments Ltd and Another

HCSA 56 & 57/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO 56 OF 2014

(ON APPEAL FROM SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

CLAIM NO 16911 OF 2014)

____________

____________

AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO 57 OF 2014

(ON APPEAL FROM SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

CLAIM NO 22437 OF 2014)

____________

____________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1.The defendants were landlord of two adjacent properties. The claimant was the tenant. The claimant sues for refund of the deposit on termination of the tenancy at a time when the new tenancy agreement was not yet delivered to her.

2.The defendant counterclaims for damages being loss of rental for the uncompleted rental period. 

3.The claimant now seeks leave to appeal on the grounds set out in the application form.  They are effectively similar for both applications for leave to appeal.

4.In substance, the claimant’s complaint is that the learned Presiding Officer erred in law in failing to consider or adequately consider the question of acceptance of the new tenancy agreement and the failure of the defendant to mitigate the loss.  I shall not repeat the grounds set out in her application.

5.I bear in mind that in seeking leave to appeal, the applicant has to satisfy the court that she is appealing on the ground involving a question of law.  The onus is on her to show that the intended appeal has arguable grounds.

6.Having considered the submission of counsel and the draft grounds of appeal, I am satisfied that there are arguable grounds shown and I give leave in respect of both applications.

(Discussion between Court and Counsel)

7.I will just put down a note here that I give you leave to amend those two application forms to reflect the date of 5 November. Amended to 5 November to replace 4 November.

(Discussion between Court and Counsel)

8.Costs reserved.

Mr T Chow, instructed by C L Chow & Macksion Chan, for the claimants