SCAIFFEE LTD v. CHOW HET CHUEN AND OTHERS

SCAIFFEE LTD v. CHOW HET CHUEN AND OTHERS

The Tribunal held that the statutory formula based on rateable value applies only to minimum compensation; reasonable compensation must be the equivalent of the tenant's actual loss measured by the value of the tenant's expected future use of the premises (tenant's particular interest) plus reasonable disturbance costs; past occupation or sentimental attachment is not a monetisable measure of compensation; apportionment between principal tenant and sub‑tenant must reflect their respective interests.

Citation
SCAIFFEE LTD v. CHOW HET CHUEN AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: Scaiffee Ltd; Respondent: Barbara C. Woon; Respondent: Hung Pak; Respondent (sub Tenant): Fung Kan; Respondent: Kung Hong Koon
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 July 1983
Case Number
LDLA13/1983
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant — Possession for Redevelopment and Compensation Under Cap.7 Part II / Tribunal Award (victoria Lands Tribunal)
Outcome
Tribunal awarded compensatory sums to named respondents; repossession order under s.53(2)(c) had been made earlier; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Measure of Compensation, Protected Tenancy, Redevelopment Possession, Rateable Value, Disturbance
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Compulsory Acquisition/compensation Measure of Compensation Protected Tenancy Redevelopment Possession Rateable Value Disturbance

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scaiffee Ltd

Applicant

Barbara C. Woon

Respondent

Hung Pak

Respondent

Fung Kan

Respondent (sub Tenant)

Kung Hong Koon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant — Possession for Redevelopment and Compensation Under Cap.7 Part II / Tribunal Award (victoria Lands Tribunal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether compensation for termination under s.53(2)(c) read with s.53A(2) and s.53A(4)(a) should be calculated by the prescribed rateable‑value formula or by full measure of tenant's actual loss
  2. 2 Whether the statutory minima based on rateable value were intended to be the sole or full measure of compensation or only a floor
  3. 3 What components constitute reasonable compensation to a protected tenant (future use value, disturbance, sentimental/past occupation)

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the statutory formula based on rateable value applies only to minimum compensation; reasonable compensation must be the equivalent of the tenant's actual loss measured by the value of the tenant's expected future use of the premises (tenant's particular interest) plus reasonable disturbance costs; past occupation or sentimental attachment is not a monetisable measure of compensation; apportionment between principal tenant and sub‑tenant must reflect their respective interests.

Court Disposition

Tribunal awarded compensatory sums to named respondents; repossession order under s.53(2)(c) had been made earlier; no order as to costs

Orders

  • Awarded to Barbara C. Woon (R13) HKD 166000 to be paid one half within 14 days and balance on 31 October 1983 or on delivery of vacant possession whichever is sooner
  • Awarded to Hung Pak (R14) HKD 111600 and to sub‑tenant Fung Kan (R14(1)) HKD 12400 (apportionment 90%/10%) to be paid one half within 14 days and balance on 31 October 1983 or on delivery of vacant possession whichever is sooner