LAM KIT YEE v. LAM SHUK LAM AND ANOTHER

LAM KIT YEE v. LAM SHUK LAM AND ANOTHER

On the evidence, including dye tests, official inspections (FEHD/BD/MSL) and the credible expert report of Mr Hau, the court found the source of seepage was Flat 7A; defendants breached Clause 13 of the DMC and were liable in nuisance and negligence; plaintiff awarded damages and injunctive relief; defendants' expert evidence was rejected as unreliable.

Citation
LAM KIT YEE v. LAM SHUK LAM AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Lam Kit Yee; 1st Defendant: Lam Shuk Lam; 2nd Defendant: Chiang Chi
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 March 2017
Case Number
DCCJ3115/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (property Dispute — Water Seepage; Nuisance, Negligence, Breach of Deed of Mutual Covenant) / Judgment After Trial (district Court, 10 March 2017)
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
Water Seepage, Nuisance, Negligence, Breach of Deed of Mutual Covenant (clause 13), Injunction, Damages, Expert Evidence Admissibility and Weight
Source Language
EN
Property Tort Contract Building and Construction Law Civil Procedure/expert Evidence Water Seepage Nuisance Negligence +4 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lam Kit Yee

Plaintiff

Lam Shuk Lam

1st Defendant

Chiang Chi

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (property Dispute — Water Seepage; Nuisance, Negligence, Breach of Deed of Mutual Covenant) / Judgment After Trial (district Court, 10 March 2017)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether water seepage in Flat 6A originated from Flat 7A or from other sources (eg fresh water pipes within Flat 6A)
  2. 2 If Flat 7A was the source, the period during which Flat 6A was affected and whether seepage had ceased
  3. 3 Whether defendants are liable in breach of the DMC, nuisance and/or negligence

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence, including dye tests, official inspections (FEHD/BD/MSL) and the credible expert report of Mr Hau, the court found the source of seepage was Flat 7A; defendants breached Clause 13 of the DMC and were liable in nuisance and negligence; plaintiff awarded damages and injunctive relief; defendants' expert evidence was rejected as unreliable.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment for plaintiff against the defendants for HKD 320500
  • Interest on HKD 320500 at half-judgment rate from date of writ until judgment and thereafter at judgment rate until full payment