LEE LAI BING v. NG YU AND OTHERS

LEE LAI BING v. NG YU AND OTHERS

The amended s.53(2)(e) of Cap 7, as enacted by Ordinance No.76/81, must be applied to pending proceedings because the language and scheme of the amendment demonstrate a clear contrary intention to oust the preservation of accrued rights under Cap 1 s.23(c); consequently the court must require proof that subletting...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
LEE LAI BING v. NG YU AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Lee Lai Bing; 1st Defendant (tenant): Ng Yu; 2nd Defendant (sub Tenant): Ng Moon Woo; 3rd Defendant (sub Tenant): Cheung Chung Yau; 4th Defendant (sub Tenant): Wong Wai Boon; 5th Defendant (sub Tenant): Lau Kwok Kui
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 June 1982
Case Number
DCCJ9812/1981
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant Possession / Preliminary Ruling (pending Trial)
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Possession, Subletting, Retrospectivity of Legislation, Accrued Rights, Procedural Application of Amendments
Source Language
en
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Statutory Interpretation Possession Subletting Retrospectivity of Legislation Accrued Rights Procedural Application of Amendments

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Lai Bing

Plaintiff

Ng Yu

1st Defendant (tenant)

Ng Moon Woo

2nd Defendant (sub Tenant)

Cheung Chung Yau

3rd Defendant (sub Tenant)

Wong Wai Boon

4th Defendant (sub Tenant)

Lau Kwok Kui

5th Defendant (sub Tenant)

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant Possession / Preliminary Ruling (pending Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1981 amendment to section 53(2)(e) of Cap 7 applies to tenancies which were the subject of proceedings pending at commencement (retrospectivity)
  2. 2 Whether a landlord's accrued right to possession upon issuance of a writ is preserved by s.23(c) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap 1)
  3. 3 Whether subletting without written consent remains a ground for possession under the amended provision or requires breach of the contractual tenancy

Ratio Decidendi

The amended s.53(2)(e) of Cap 7, as enacted by Ordinance No.76/81, must be applied to pending proceedings because the language and scheme of the amendment demonstrate a clear contrary intention to oust the preservation of accrued rights under Cap 1 s.23(c); consequently the court must require proof that subletting was in breach of the contractual tenancy and, as the plaintiff could not show such breach, the action is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Action dismissed