黃桂林 v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

黃桂林 v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Leave was granted because the proposed judicial review raised a reasonably arguable issue with a realistic prospect of success: specifically whether the HA and Tribunal failed to determine the applicant's state of mind (claim of being misled), a relevant factor in the exercise of statutory discretion; the court confined itself to the leave question and did not decide the merits.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 940
Parties
Applicant: Applicant; Putative Respondent: Hong Kong Housing Authority
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 April 2019
Case Number
HCAL159/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Tenancy Termination/notice to Quit / Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (leave Hearing)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review granted
Legal Topics
Notice to Quit, False Declaration, Tenancy Termination, Procedural Impropriety, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Housing Law Public Law Notice to Quit False Declaration Tenancy Termination Procedural Impropriety Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant

Applicant

Hong Kong Housing Authority

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Tenancy Termination/notice to Quit / Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (leave Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the HA and Appeal Tribunal failed to determine the applicant's state of mind when he made the declaration
  2. 2 Whether the HA/Tribunal fettered their discretion or failed to take into account relevant considerations
  3. 3 Whether the HA lawfully applied its policy to revert tenancy to the position had the applicant acted honestly

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because the proposed judicial review raised a reasonably arguable issue with a realistic prospect of success: specifically whether the HA and Tribunal failed to determine the applicant's state of mind (claim of being misled), a relevant factor in the exercise of statutory discretion; the court confined itself to the leave question and did not decide the merits.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review granted

Orders

  • Costs of the leave application and the hearing on 29 January 2019 shall be in the cause
  • No order as to the applicant's costs of preparing the draft Amended Form 86 dated 13 July 2018 and the undated Revised Amended Form 86 submitted on 16 July 2018 and 18 January 2019