CHAN PAK WAI v. THOMAS YOUNG AND OTHERS

CHAN PAK WAI v. THOMAS YOUNG AND OTHERS

The amended s.53(2)(e) must be read to extend contractual terms into the period of statutory continuance so that a landlord's statutory right to possession accrues only where the tenant's subletting breached the prior contractual tenancy; because the pleaded tenancy did not prohibit subletting there was no breach...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CHAN PAK WAI v. THOMAS YOUNG AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: CHAN PAK WAI; 1st Defendant: THOMAS YOUNG; 2nd Defendant: RASSIL COMPANY LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: OCE-HAGEMEYER (HONG KONG) LTD.
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 January 1982
Case Number
DCCJ9443/1981
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant Possession / Interlocutory Stage – Strike Out Summons; Leave to Appeal Granted
Outcome
Amended particulars of claim struck out for disclosing no cause of action; no order as to costs against the plaintiff; leave to appeal granted unconditionally
Legal Topics
Subletting, Statutory Continuance, Possession, Amendment of Ordinance, Section 53(2)(e)
Source Language
en
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Statutory Interpretation Subletting Statutory Continuance Possession Amendment of Ordinance Section 53(2)(e)

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN PAK WAI

Plaintiff

THOMAS YOUNG

1st Defendant

RASSIL COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Defendant

OCE-HAGEMEYER (HONG KONG) LTD.

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant Possession / Interlocutory Stage – Strike Out Summons; Leave to Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether amended s.53(2)(e) creates a statutory cause of action for possession where contractual tenancy did not prohibit subletting
  2. 2 Whether the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Amendment Ordinance (No. 2) 1981 removed the prior statutory requirement for written landlord consent during statutory continuance
  3. 3 Whether the amended particulars of claim disclose a cause of action after the 1981 amendments

Ratio Decidendi

The amended s.53(2)(e) must be read to extend contractual terms into the period of statutory continuance so that a landlord's statutory right to possession accrues only where the tenant's subletting breached the prior contractual tenancy; because the pleaded tenancy did not prohibit subletting there was no breach and no cause of action under s.53(2)(e), so the amended particulars of claim were struck out.

Court Disposition

Amended particulars of claim struck out for disclosing no cause of action; no order as to costs against the plaintiff; leave to appeal granted unconditionally

Orders

  • Amended particulars of claim struck out
  • No order as to costs against the plaintiff