LOW FUNG ROSIE KAI PING AND ANOTHER v. BENTEX CORPORATION (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER

LOW FUNG ROSIE KAI PING AND ANOTHER v. BENTEX CORPORATION (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER

The court found on the evidence that D1 sub-let the premises to D2 and that the second sub-lease dated 10 June 1980 was made after the operative date of the amendment and without plaintiffs' written consent; that breach of S.53(2)(e) constituted an unlawful subletting and gave rise to forfeiture; accordingly plaintiffs were entitled to judgment for possession against both defendants.

Citation
LOW FUNG ROSIE KAI PING AND ANOTHER v. BENTEX CORPORATION (A FIRM) AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Low Fung Rosie Kai Ping; 2nd Plaintiff: Low Tuck Chuen; 1st Defendant: Bentex Corporation (a firm); 2nd Defendant: Appledore Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 December 1981
Case Number
DCCJ2963/1981
Procedural Posture
Civil Landlord and Tenant (possession) / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiffs for possession of the suit premises against both defendants.
Legal Topics
Subletting, Forfeiture, Tenant Consent, Statutory Protection of Tenancies, Renewal of Tenancy
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Contract Law Statutory Interpretation Subletting Forfeiture Tenant Consent Statutory Protection of Tenancies +1 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Low Fung Rosie Kai Ping

1st Plaintiff

Low Tuck Chuen

2nd Plaintiff

Bentex Corporation (a firm)

1st Defendant

Appledore Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Landlord and Tenant (possession) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether D1 sublet the suit premises to D2
  2. 2 Whether the subletting occurred without the landlords' written consent in breach of S.53(2)(e) Cap.7
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs had knowledge of or waived the subletting

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the evidence that D1 sub-let the premises to D2 and that the second sub-lease dated 10 June 1980 was made after the operative date of the amendment and without plaintiffs' written consent; that breach of S.53(2)(e) constituted an unlawful subletting and gave rise to forfeiture; accordingly plaintiffs were entitled to judgment for possession against both defendants.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiffs for possession of the suit premises against both defendants.

Orders

  • Judgment ordering possession of Nos.126-130 Kennedy Road, Grandview Tower, 11/F and carpark space No.25 in favour of the plaintiffs against Bentex Corporation (a firm) and Appledore Limited