A Hong Kong court has dismissed the bid of a government-appointed administrator of the fire-hit Wang Fuk Court to extend the deadline to hold a meeting with homeowners. Wang Fuk Court seen in the distance on April 20, 2026. Photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP. In Tuesday’s judgment, Judge Gary Lam, presiding officer of the Lands Tribunal, denied Hop On Management’s application to delay a statutory deadline to hold an owners’ general meeting, saying the court had no jurisdiction to make such a decision under the Buildings Management Ordinance (BMO).
Hop On – appointed as the administrator of the Tai Po housing estate in January following the deadly blaze – had applied to the tribunal to postpone the May 13 deadline for convening an owners’ meeting, as well as the June 13 deadline for holding the meeting.
It also asked the court to suggest alternative methods for notifying homeowners, as providing mailed notice was considered “impracticable and/or ineffective” after the fire in November.
‘Substantive right’
Judge Lam said in the ruling that postponing the deadline would affect homeowners’ right to have a meeting.
He wrote that the right to request a corporation meeting, in his view, “a fundament[al] substantive right of an owner so that the owner would be afforded [the] opportunity to come together to be informed, discuss and deliberate, and/or participate in and [make] decisions concerning the management of the buildings.” “The right to convene and hold a meeting is the two sides of the same coin,” Lam added. “To vary the timeframe would in my view vary the substantive right created by statute.” Hectar Pun (left), counsel for government-appointed administrator Hop On Management, leaves the Lands Tribunal on June 1, 2026. Photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP. In addition, Lam said, “not a word” in the ordinance suggests that the timeframe for holding the meeting can be varied, “let alone that the Tribunal or any other Courts would have any jurisdiction to vary the timeframe.”
“I am of the view that it is plain and obvious the BMO confers no jurisdiction on the Tribunal” to extend the deadline, the judge said.
Lam also said that Hop On remained in breach of its statutory obligations and added that it should “convene and hold the meeting as requested as soon as possible” to minimise any further potential breaches.
He also noted that Hop On’s difficulty with contacting owners was “not insurmountable” as it had managed to collect addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of 1,601 owners out of 1,984 units at Wang Fuk Court, while the Home Affairs Department had given the firm the owners’ contact numbers.
On April 29, Hop On, a subsidiary of real estate giant Chinachem Group, received a petition with 247 handwritten signatures asking the firm to meet with flat owners to discuss long-term resettlement and related financial matters.
The total number of signatures supporting the petition exceeded the 5 per cent threshold needed to convene a meeting stipulated by the Buildings Management Ordinance.
According to the ordinance, the management committee should issue notice of the meeting within 14 days and hold the general meeting with owners within 45 days.