Read the full judgment text of CACV 000186/2003 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 16 October 2003 before Levy.
Civil procedure – appeal from Lands Tribunal – setting down of appeal – whether governed by Order 59 r.5 or Order 60A r.4 of the High Court Rules – whether sealed copy of judgment or order required – whether appeal against reasoned judgment permissible – whether appeal on a point of law – Building Management Ordinance s.34I – interpretation of "owners committee" – Lands Tribunal Ordinance (Cap.17) s.11(2) and s.11(4) – Registrar of Civil Appeals – 23 Applicants who were owners of units in a shopping arcade comprising 3 floors – 1st Respondent as building manager – 2nd Respondent as owner of about 70% of the building – claims for wrongful conversion of common parts, improper use of sinking fund, and excessive remuneration – Lands Tribunal Presiding Officer found in favour of Applicants on conversion claim only and ordered damages with quantum to be agreed – Appellant (2nd Respondent) sought to set aside damages order – Held: setting down of appeal from Lands Tribunal is governed by Order 60A r.4 of the HCR and not Order 59 r.5 – sealed copy of order or judgment not required under Order 60A r.4 – appeal is not against a reasoned judgment but against a determination – appeal is on a point of law as grounds relate to interpretation of s.34I of the Building Management Ordinance and meaning of "owners committee" – Setting down on 7 July 2003 held to be regular – Reasons for Decision authorized for publication.
Legal issues: Governing rule for setting down appeal from Lands Tribunal · Whether sealed copy of order or judgment required for setting down · Whether appeal is against a reasoned judgment · Whether appeal is on a point of law
Outcome: The Registrar ruled that the setting down of the appeal on 7 July 2003 was regular and validly effected in accordance with Order 60A r.4 of the HCR.
Cites 1 case