SUPREMACY TRADING CO LTD v. ASIAN PROPERTY INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER

HCSA 56 & 57/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO 56 OF 2014

(ON APPEAL FROM SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

CLAIM NO 16911 OF 2014)

____________

BETWEEN
SUPREMACY TRADING COMPANY LIMITED Claimant
and
ASIAN PROPERTY INVESTMENTS LTD 1st Defendant
PEARL DRAGON INVESTMENTS LIMITED 2nd Defendant

____________

AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO 57 OF 2014

(ON APPEAL FROM SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

CLAIM NO 22437 OF 2014)

____________

BETWEEN
SUPREMACY TRADING COMPANY LIMITED Claimant
and
PEARL DRAGON INVESTMENTS LIMITED Defendant

____________

Before: Hon Au-Yeung J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 3 December 2014
Date of Decision: 3 December 2014

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1. The defendants were landlord of two adjacent properties. The claimant was the tenant. The claimant sues for refund of the depositon termination of the tenancy at a time when the new tenancy agreement was not yet delivered to her.

2. The defendant counterclaims for damages being loss of rental for the uncompleted rental period.

3. The claimant now seeks leave to appeal on the grounds set out in the application form. They are effectively similar for both applicationsfor leave to appeal.

4. In substance, the claimant’s complaint is that the learned Presiding Officer erred in law in failing to consider or adequatelyconsider the question of acceptance of the new tenancy agreement and the failure of the defendant to mitigate the loss. I shallnot repeat the grounds set out in her application.

5. I bear in mind that in seeking leave to appeal, the applicant has to satisfy the court that she is appealing on the ground involvinga question of law. The onus is on her to show that the intended appeal has arguable grounds.

6. Having considered the submission of counsel and the draft grounds of appeal, I am satisfied that there are arguable grounds shownand I give leave in respect of both applications.

(Discussion between Court and Counsel)

7. I will just put down a note here that I give you leave to amend those two application forms to reflect the date of 5 November. Amendedto 5 November to replace 4 November.

(Discussion between Court and Counsel)

8. Costs reserved.

(Queeny Au-Yeung)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Mr T Chow, instructed by C L Chow & Macksion Chan, for the claimants