|
HCMP 243/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 243 OF 2011
____________________
| |
IN THE MATTER of the Land Registration Ordinance, Cap 128
|
| |
and |
| |
IN THE MATTER of Units “A” and “B” on the 1st Floor, Garden “B”, and Car Parking Spaces No. 7 on the Ground Floor of Block A and Nos. 2 and 3 on the Ground Floor of Block B of No. 3 Severn Road, Hong Kong (as more particularly described in Schedule A and Schedule B hereto) upon Rural Building Lot No. 155 and the extension thereto (the “Properties”)
|
| |
and |
|
| |
IN THE MATTER of a resulting or constructive trust whereunder the Properties are held for the Plaintiff by the 1st Defendant hereto
|
| |
and |
|
| |
IN THE MATTER of Order 113 of the Rules of High Court, Cap 4A
|
|
____________________
HCMP 522/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 522 OF 2011
| ____________________ |
| |
IN THE MATTER of Order 113 of the Rules of High Court, Cap 4A
|
| |
and |
|
| |
IN THE MATTER of the land and premises known as:
|
| |
(a) Unit A of the 1st Floor, Severn Villa, 3 Severn Road, The Peak, Hong Kong; |
| |
(b) Unit B of the 1st Floor, Severn Villa, 3 Severn Road, The Peak, Hong Kong; |
| |
(c) Car Park Space Nos. 1 to 5 on the Ground Floor of Block B, Severn Villa, 3 Severn Road, The Peak, Hong Kong |
|
____________________
BETWEEN
| |
MIMI KAR KEE WONG HUNG |
Plaintiff |
| |
(also known as MIMI KAR GEE WONG HUNG) |
|
|
and
|
| |
SEVERN VILLA LIMITED |
1st Defendant |
| |
APPLIED DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LIMITED |
2nd Defendant |
| |
RAYMOND KIN SANG HUNG |
3rd Defendant |
| |
APPLIED PROPERTIES LIMITED |
4th Defendant |
| |
(Consolidated by the Order of Deputy High Court Judge Carlson dated 7 June 2011) |
|
Before: Deputy High Court Judge Carlson in Chambers
Date of Hearing: 1 June 2012
Date of Delivery of Ruling: 1 June 2012
______________
R U L I N G
______________
1. I have got to approach this matter on the basis that the order that was made on 4 May obliged Miss Wong to leave this property, I
think it was on 3 June, and at the time, I refused an application for a stay.
2. Of course, the matter is now really put forward on the basis that there has been a change of circumstances. She has had these difficulties in finding other suitable accommodation, and there is a complicating factor which I need to bear in mind, which is this extremely valuable collection of furniture that is accommodated at the property.
3. Mr Grossman, as he usually does, has put the matter attractively and very moderately by saying, “Please can we have a further just over two weeks?” The evidence now seems to be firming up that Miss Wong does have a tenancy at Estoril Court, and what is said is if I give her these two weeks, she will be able to move.
4. But the other side of the coin, as Mr Chan has drawn attention to, is the fact that although, of course, he recognises I have a discretion in this matter, it is a rather narrow one in the circumstances of this case. The companies here are entitled to stand on their legal rights, and having regard to the rather limited - it has been described as the last residual discretion - I have decided to address that as best I can.
5. And so what I have decided to do, having heard Mr Grossman in reply, is that the right order is to grant his client an interim stay to 4 pm on Saturday, 9 June. I am going to have this relisted on 8 June, together with the divorce proceedings. That matter - the question of the furniture - is going to be reconsidered on that day. My advice - Mr Grossman hears what I say and no doubt he is going to tell his client - is that she must now take immediate steps to have this valuable collection removed by some specialist removal company, and it can be stored there, and then I will decide on Friday what is to happen to the furniture.
6. Mr Benjamin Yu SC, who is not here today, because that aspect of it is not listed before me today, would wish me to make some sort of order preserving the furniture in the safekeeping of a particular storage company that specialises in the packing, transportation and storage of antiques. That can all be decided next Friday, when I will also decide how to finally dispose of this particular application today, and if I may, Mr Chan, I will just reserve the costs of today until next Friday.
(Discussion as to orders)
7. The stay is until 4 pm on next Saturday, but the case will be relisted on Friday, the 8th, at 9.30.
8. I will reserve these costs.
|
(Ian Carlson)
Deputy High Court Judge |
Clive Grossman, SC, instructed by Messrs Ho & Ip, for the Plaintiff
Abraham Chan, instructed by Messrs Baker & McKenzie, for the 1st, 2nd and 4th Defendants
|