AHN, EUNSUN v. WO KWOK WAI AND ANOTHER

AHN, EUNSUN v. WO KWOK WAI AND ANOTHER

The review is dismissed because the applicant failed to serve the statutory section 58 warning notice prior to the cause of action; a termination notice served after judgment cannot remedy that defect and therefore there is no ground for review. The applicant remains free to serve a compliant warning notice and, if breach persists, to commence a fresh possession application.

Citation
[2024] HKLdT 31
Parties
Applicant: AHN, EUNSUN; 1st Respondent: WO KWOK WAI; 2nd Respondent: TO KIT CHI
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 April 2024
Case Number
LDPD152/2024
Procedural Posture
Recovery of Possession (landlord and Tenant) / Decision on Review (section 11 a Lands Tribunal Ordinance)
Outcome
Application for Review dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 58 Warning Notice, Forfeiture/right of Re Entry, Possession, Security Deposit, Quiet Enjoyment, Rescission, Review of Tribunal Decision, Criminal Allegation of Loitering
Source Language
EN
Conveyancing and Property Landlord and Tenant Civil Procedure Section 58 Warning Notice Forfeiture/right of Re Entry Possession Security Deposit Quiet Enjoyment +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AHN, EUNSUN

Applicant

WO KWOK WAI

1st Respondent

TO KIT CHI

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Recovery of Possession (landlord and Tenant) / Decision on Review (section 11 a Lands Tribunal Ordinance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a right of re-entry/forfeiture is enforceable absent service of a section 58 warning notice prior to the cause of action
  2. 2 Whether service of a termination notice after judgment cures failure to serve a prior section 58 warning notice
  3. 3 Whether persistence in alleged breach after judgment constitutes ground for review

Ratio Decidendi

The review is dismissed because the applicant failed to serve the statutory section 58 warning notice prior to the cause of action; a termination notice served after judgment cannot remedy that defect and therefore there is no ground for review. The applicant remains free to serve a compliant warning notice and, if breach persists, to commence a fresh possession application.

Court Disposition

Application for Review dismissed

Orders

  • Application for Review dismissed
  • No order as to costs (decision made on papers)