WE SHARP LTD v. SAMTANI ANAND P.

WE SHARP LTD v. SAMTANI ANAND P.

The Tribunal found the whatsapp communications established the rent reduction took effect from 9 May 2016 (leaving $1,000 outstanding for May), the respondent was not entitled to withhold rent for the termite issue because the landlord acted promptly and there was insufficient evidence of uninhabitability or of landlord causation, equitable set-off did not apply, and therefore judgment was entered for the applicant for delivery of vacant possession and payment of arrears subject to a limited deduction and conditional relief from forfeiture if arrears and costs paid by 8 September 2016.

Citation
WE SHARP LTD v. SAMTANI ANAND P.
Parties
Applicant: We Sharp Ltd; Respondent: Samtani Anand P.
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 September 2016
Case Number
LDPD1548/2016
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant — Recovery of Rent and Possession / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for Applicant: relief granted for possession and recovery of arrears; conditional relief from forfeiture if arrears and costs paid by 8 September 2016.
Legal Topics
Rent Arrears, Forfeiture, Relief From Forfeiture, Equitable Set Off, Habitability, Mesne Profits
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Property Civil Procedure Contract Rent Arrears Forfeiture Relief From Forfeiture Equitable Set Off +2 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

We Sharp Ltd

Applicant

Samtani Anand P.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant — Recovery of Rent and Possession / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the rent reduction commenced on 9 May 2016 or 9 June 2016
  2. 2 Whether the respondent could withhold rent or claim set-off for termite infestation and remediation work
  3. 3 Whether the Lands Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain the respondent's claim for damages/counterclaim

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found the whatsapp communications established the rent reduction took effect from 9 May 2016 (leaving $1,000 outstanding for May), the respondent was not entitled to withhold rent for the termite issue because the landlord acted promptly and there was insufficient evidence of uninhabitability or of landlord causation, equitable set-off did not apply, and therefore judgment was entered for the applicant for delivery of vacant possession and payment of arrears subject to a limited deduction and conditional relief from forfeiture if arrears and costs paid by 8 September 2016.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Applicant: relief granted for possession and recovery of arrears; conditional relief from forfeiture if arrears and costs paid by 8 September 2016.

Orders

  • Respondent to deliver vacant possession of the suit premises to the Applicant
  • Respondent to pay arrears of rent/mesne profits at $1,000 for arrears up to 8 June 2016 and $9,000 per month from 9 June 2016 until delivery of vacant possession