LEGENT CERAMIC LTD v. RAINBOW CHOICE INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

LEGENT CERAMIC LTD v. RAINBOW CHOICE INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

Rainbow Choice was liable because the court found on the evidence that debris causing the blocked drain and the resultant flood originated from Rainbow Choice's renovation works and that Rainbow Choice failed in its duty to prevent/repair the hole between the 1st Floor and the shop; the Incorporated Owners, though...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
LEGENT CERAMIC LTD v. RAINBOW CHOICE INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Legent Ceramic Limited; 1st Defendant: Rainbow Choice Investment Limited; 2nd Defendant: The Incorporated Owners of Hang Tat Mansion; Third Party: The Incorporated Owners of Hang Tat Mansion
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 June 2011
Case Number
DCCJ2434/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Negligence (district Court) / Judgment Delivered After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff against 1st Defendant (Rainbow Choice); Plaintiff's claim against the Incorporated Owners dismissed; Rainbow Choice's third party claim against the Incorporated Owners dismissed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty to Maintain Common Parts, Causation, Contribution and Indemnity, Estoppel, Costs, Expert Evidence
Source Language
en
Tort Property Building Management Civil Procedure Damages Negligence Duty to Maintain Common Parts Causation +4 more

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Legent Ceramic Limited

Plaintiff

Rainbow Choice Investment Limited

1st Defendant

The Incorporated Owners of Hang Tat Mansion

2nd Defendant

The Incorporated Owners of Hang Tat Mansion

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Negligence (district Court) / Judgment Delivered After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rainbow Choice and/or the IO caused the blockage of the drain hole at the canopy
  2. 2 Which party was responsible for overflow of water from the canopy into plaintiff's shop
  3. 3 Quantum and proof of alleged loss and damage by plaintiff

Ratio Decidendi

Rainbow Choice was liable because the court found on the evidence that debris causing the blocked drain and the resultant flood originated from Rainbow Choice's renovation works and that Rainbow Choice failed in its duty to prevent/repair the hole between the 1st Floor and the shop; the Incorporated Owners, though accepting maintenance duty for the canopy, had no notice and were not liable as the risk of this specific flooding was not reasonably foreseeable, so IO's liability was dismissed and Rainbow's third party claim against IO failed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff against 1st Defendant (Rainbow Choice); Plaintiff's claim against the Incorporated Owners dismissed; Rainbow Choice's third party claim against the Incorporated Owners dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment for Legent Ceramic Limited against Rainbow Choice Investment Limited in the sum of HK$8,068
  • Interest on HK$8,068 at half judgment rate from 19 April 2008 to date of judgment excluding period 17 September 2008 to 19 September 2009; interest from judgment until payment to run at the judgment rate