Public open space controversy
Under the terms of a Deeds of Dedication signed with the Government, 3010 m2 of the ground floor was set aside for public access, pedestrian passage and passive recreation. However, the company has the right to organise exhibitions there, and charge fees. The exact details of the concessions to the developers were not made public.[14]
Between July 2003 and March 2005, a corner of the piazza was leased to Starbucks Coffee. The company claimed it was an "unintentional oversight" that was quickly corrected after notification was received from the Buildings Department.[14]
In 2008, controversy was again sparked following complaints that private security guards attempted to stop people lingering in the public area, and building management apologised for their "over-zealous" guards.[15] Since then, there has been a wider campaign in Hong Kong to re-examine provisions for public open space, and the government quid pro quo with property developers. [16] Alan Leong lamented the poor quality of some of Hong Kong's public open spaces, and said he hoped that a Legco review would result in a "more transparent and predictable system".[17]
The Secretary for Justice, filed a writ in the High Court on behalf of the Government against Times Square Ltd and its parent company Wharf Group, seeking to recover rental fees of as much as HK$124,000 a day for use of the Causeway Bay piazza dating back to 1993. Commentators describe it as a landmark lawsuit which may have significant implications for other property owners if it is successful.[16][18]
The company believes that it has not charged more than what is allowed in the deed, but welcomed the case saying it would ultimately provide for guidance on the proper interpretation of the relevant clauses in the deed of dedication concerned.[16]
