time". In accordance with section 17(b) of the Ordinance,
the compensation award was paid into the General Revenue in
1980.
It seems that this situation arose because Mr Lau and
his brother did not obtain the Letters of Administration for
their father's estate until 1983, some four years after the claim period had expired. This was due to a family
disagreement. Mr Lau's father died in September 1973 and
until 1983 therefore, the Hong Kong Government were unable
to identify the person to whom the compensation should be
paid.
I understand that in some instances the claim period
for compensation can be extended at the Governor's
discretion. This can be done if the claimant has not been
offered compensation for his land/in writing, or if he has not been served with a notice. Unfortunately, this does not apply to Mr Lau, as notification of the compensation award was given in 1974.
Special
The Hong Kong Government in some circumstances is also
prepared to consider late payments to pre-1982 cases. The
Buildings and Lands Department has considered the
circumstances of Mr Lau's case. However the Department does
not consider that Mr Lau's specifit case merits exception. It takes the view there are no circumstances which justify the delays in the Mr Lau's attempts to obtain compensation. For example, Mr Lau failed to produce Letters of
Administration for his father's land until 1983. Even then
Mr Lau had ample opportunity to pursue his claim but did not do so until December 1987. The Department considers that
there is no evidence to suggest that these delays were
beyond Mr Lau's control. In the absence of such evidence
sees no justification, at the present time, for any payment
to be made to Mr Lau.
SAMACA/2