Lai Siu Wai Louis v Ho King Yin Edwin And Others

CourtDistrict Court (Hong Kong)
Judgement NumberDCCJ4041/2011
Subject MatterCivil Action
DCCJ4041/2011 LAI SIU WAI LOUIS v. HO KING YIN EDWIN AND OTHERS

DCCJ4041/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4041 OF 2011

________________________

BETWEEN

LAI SIU WAI LOUIS
lawful attorney of 譚翠好
Plaintiff

and

HO KING YIN EDWIN 1st Defendant
LEE KWOK MAN 2nd Defendant
LAM SHU KEE 3rd Defendant
KO KIM FUNG JACOB 4th Defendant

________________________

Before: H H Judge Chow in Chambers (Open to the public)
Date of Hearing: 24 April 2012
Date of Decision: 24 April 2012

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

1. This is the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants’ application to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim. The situation of the 4th defendant has been dealt with.

2. This morning, the defendants’ counsel informed me that the only basis to strike out the statement of claim is Order 18, rule 19 of the Rules of the District Court, on the ground that the statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action against the defendants. According to the statement of claim, the plaintiff is the lawful attorney of Madam 譚翠好, and sues for and on behalf of her against the defendants for the reliefs as prayed for in the prayer of claim for her interest and benefit.

3. At all material times, Madam Tam is the registered owner of all that piece of land registered in the Land Registry as section B of Lot Number 2787 in DD 120 (“the said piece of land”). There are erected upon the said piece of land various erections/facilities, including but limited to one security room (“the said security room”) and one iron gate (“the said iron gate”), being all fixtures of the said piece of land. The significance of being fixtures of the said piece of land is that they have become part and parcel of the said piece of land.

4. Golden Years Investment Limited leased from Madam Tam all the erections/facilities, including the said security room and the said iron gate. On 13 August 2011, the 1st, 2nd and the 3rd defendants, as members of 君逸軒業主委員會 of Queen’s Park, procured to gain possession of the said security room after an incident of intrusion by a third-party trespasser on that day and installed a lock upon the door of the said security room thereafter. Despite demands and requests on the part of the plaintiff for and on behalf of Madam Tam, the defendants did...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT