SZETO CHOP AND OTHERS v. CHUTE INVESTMENT CO LTD

SZETO CHOP AND OTHERS v. CHUTE INVESTMENT CO LTD

The Tribunal held applicants were entitled to compensation under ss.18 and 18A of the Buildings Ordinance for loss of rental value and for necessary repair costs; insufficient evidence supported a separate award for loss of profits; the shoring was reasonably expected to remain until June 1986, rental reductions were assessed (10% for ground-floor shop, 25% for first-floor flat), future losses were discounted at 12% to present value, and awards were made accordingly with orders for restoration under s.18(4) and payment of costs on the District Court scale.

Citation
SZETO CHOP AND OTHERS v. CHUTE INVESTMENT CO LTD
Parties
1st Applicant (tenant, Ground Floor): Szeto Chop; 2nd Applicant (tenant, First Floor): Wong Kam-sau; 3rd Applicant (tenant): Lau Ming-po; Respondent (owner/developer): Cute Investment Company Limited
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 February 1984
Case Number
LDBG3/1981
Procedural Posture
Compensation Under Buildings Ordinance (cap.123) Sections 18 and 18 a / Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Partial awards granted to applicants HB2 and HB3; HB4 settled by consent
Legal Topics
Compensation for Shoring, Loss of Rental Value, Repair Obligations Under Section 18(4), Assessment of Future Losses, Interest and Present Value, Costs
Source Language
EN
Land Law Tenancy Law Statutory Compensation Building Regulation Compensation for Shoring Loss of Rental Value Repair Obligations Under Section 18(4) Assessment of Future Losses +2 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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Szeto Chop

1st Applicant (tenant, Ground Floor)

Wong Kam-sau

2nd Applicant (tenant, First Floor)

Lau Ming-po

3rd Applicant (tenant)

Cute Investment Company Limited

Respondent (owner/developer)

Procedural Posture

Compensation Under Buildings Ordinance (cap.123) Sections 18 and 18 a / Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Entitlement to compensation under Buildings Ordinance ss.18 and 18A for shoring damage and loss of use
  2. 2 Proper measure and quantum of loss of rental value and repair costs
  3. 3 Whether accommodation was uninhabitable and degree of rental reduction

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held applicants were entitled to compensation under ss.18 and 18A of the Buildings Ordinance for loss of rental value and for necessary repair costs; insufficient evidence supported a separate award for loss of profits; the shoring was reasonably expected to remain until June 1986, rental reductions were assessed (10% for ground-floor shop, 25% for first-floor flat), future losses were discounted at 12% to present value, and awards were made accordingly with orders for restoration under s.18(4) and payment of costs on the District Court scale.

Court Disposition

Partial awards granted to applicants HB2 and HB3; HB4 settled by consent

Orders

  • HB4 settlement by consent: respondent to pay Lau Ming-po (Kam Chee Hong) $2,000
  • HB2 (Szeto Chop) compensation awarded totalling $16,900