Read the full judgment text of LDCS 4000/2013 on BabelCite. This Lands Tribunal judgment was delivered on 19 January 2015 before His Honour Judge K W WONG.
Land (Compulsory Sale For Redevelopment) Ordinance, Cap 545 – specific discovery under O.24 r.7 of RHC – compulsory sale of Kai Tak Mansion (KTM) – redevelopment value (RDV) – Town Planning Ordinance, Cap 131 – whether the 3 restrictions (BHR, NBA, BG) imposed in OZP 26/27/28 remain applicable in assessing RDV – judicial review of TPB's restrictions quashed by Reyes J and upheld by the Court of Appeal – whether court documents in JRs and CA proceedings (items 4 & 5) are discoverable for assessing RDV – whether documents in s.12A rezoning application to permit hotel use (item 2) are discoverable – whether court documents in the interpretation proceedings concerning the height restriction in the Government lease (item 7) are discoverable – KTM site over 50 years old with majority owners seeking compulsory sale – applicants' valuation expert assumed 3 restrictions remain in place, requiring payment of land premium – no correspondence between applicants and Director of Lands on lease modification – held: discovery of all 4 remaining categories of documents is not necessary either for disposing fairly of the cause or matter or for saving costs – redevelopment models in JR and CA proceedings are merely hypothetical expert opinion models, and it is for the impartial valuation experts to formulate the optimal development model for assessing maximum RDV under Cap 545 – rezoning application outcome under s.12A TPO cannot be predicted with certainty, distinguishing Ultra Alpha – interpretation proceedings involve pure questions of construction of documents unlikely to involve factual dispute – summonses dismissed, each participating party to bear its own costs, time for R40 to file evidence in reply extended to 2 February 2015.
Legal issues: Discovery of court documents in JRs and CA proceedings (items 4 & 5) · Discovery of re-zoning application documents (item 2) · Discovery of court documents in interpretation proceedings (item 7)
Outcome: R40's two summonses for specific discovery were dismissed. The order nisi was made that each participating party (applicants, R40, R22, R33 and R44) bear its own costs of the summonses.
Cites 3 cases