Bradstone Ltd. v. Carry Express Investment Ltd.

Bradstone Ltd. v. Carry Express Investment Ltd.

The Form CR 101 was valid because, read as a whole, the printed statement of opposition together with the respondent's inserted wording sufficiently and unambiguously conveyed that the landlord would oppose the grant of a new tenancy on the ground of rent default; the notice must be liberally construed and minor drafting defects do not invalidate it where the substance of s.119(5) is satisfied.

Citation
Bradstone Ltd. v. Carry Express Investment Ltd.
Parties
Landlord (owner): Bradstone Limited; Tenant: Carry Express Investment Limited
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 May 1995
Case Number
LDPB764/1995
Procedural Posture
Lands Tribunal Application Concerning Grant of New Tenancy / Interlocutory Application for Preliminary Ruling on Validity of Form CR 101
Outcome
Form CR 101 declared valid for purposes of s.119(5); interlocutory application dismissed
Legal Topics
Termination Notice Validity, Form CR 101, Landlord and Tenant (consolidation) Ordinance S.119, Costs Jurisdiction
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Statutory Interpretation Tribunal Procedure Termination Notice Validity Form CR 101 Landlord and Tenant (consolidation) Ordinance S.119 Costs Jurisdiction

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

Parties

Bradstone Limited

Landlord (owner)

Carry Express Investment Limited

Tenant

Procedural Posture

Lands Tribunal Application Concerning Grant of New Tenancy / Interlocutory Application for Preliminary Ruling on Validity of Form CR 101

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Form CR 101 complied with s.119(5) by stating whether the landlord would oppose an application for a new tenancy and, if so, the grounds of opposition
  2. 2 Whether failure to delete alternative sub-paragraph rendered the notice ineffective
  3. 3 Whether ambiguous wording inserted as ground could properly be read as a statement of opposition and sufficient ground

Ratio Decidendi

The Form CR 101 was valid because, read as a whole, the printed statement of opposition together with the respondent's inserted wording sufficiently and unambiguously conveyed that the landlord would oppose the grant of a new tenancy on the ground of rent default; the notice must be liberally construed and minor drafting defects do not invalidate it where the substance of s.119(5) is satisfied.

Court Disposition

Form CR 101 declared valid for purposes of s.119(5); interlocutory application dismissed

Orders

  • Form CR 101 held valid
  • No order as to costs