毓華樓業主立案法團 v. 蔡六乘 AND OTHERS

IN THE LANDS TRIBUNAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

BUILDING MANAGEMENT APPLICATION

Application No. LDBM 40 of 2001

_________________

-----------------------

RULING ON COSTS

-----------------------

1. The Applicant opposed the application for costs regarding the amendment on the basis that the point as to the correct number of total units, viz whether it should be 77 or 78 units were not raised in the Notice of Opposition and were only raised belatedly in the Respondents' skeleton opening.

2. The applicant said that they should not be permitted to raise the point without an amendment of their Notice of Opposition. That may or may not be so. I do not have to decide that. This is because the Applicant, instead of objecting to the point being raised at the last hearing, chose to make an application for adjournment to enable them to put their house in order regarding this point and I am now dealing with their application for leave to amend their Form 29.

3. If the Applicant has confidence in their stance on the in inadmissibility of the point, they should have pursued with that objection at the hearing. That may have resulted in an application for amendment of the Notice of Opposition by the 1st to 3rd Respondents. But since the Applicant has taken another course, they have to accept its consequences. The Applicant said they adopted this course with a view to save time. However, I am of the view that they also did so in recognition of the fact that their previous calculation were wrong, hence the need for further meetings on 18 July 2001 and 24 July 2001 to approve the new calculation. In these circumstances, I hold that the usual rule applies and the Applicant has to bear the costs of the amendment.