Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Apportionment of renovation costs

Legal area

Court

6 May 2009

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KELLY HOUSE v. LAW HAN YING

Citation

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KELLY HOUSE v. LAW HAN YING
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM224/2008

Clause 4(h) of the DMC only prescribes monthly payments on account and does not fix ultimate apportionment. Clause 4(f)(I) contains no formula for apportioning costs; therefore section 22(2) of the Building Management Ordinance applies and the Tribunal correctly fixed contributions according to the respective undivided shares of the owners. Accordingly the respondent was liable for the outstanding contribution and the IO's claim succeeded; the counterclaim was dismissed.
27 Feb 2001

The Incorporated Owners of Man Ying Building v. Lai Ming Fung

Citation

The Incorporated Owners of Man Ying Building v. Lai Ming Fung
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM342/1999

The renovation works constituted contingency expenditure for which the DMC was silent on contribution apportionment; therefore s.22(2) of the Building Management Ordinance applied and the respondent's liability is fixed in proportion to undivided shares (resulting in HK$4,758.60). The Applicant's resolution relying on paragraph (h) to equally apportion the HK$20,700,000 among units was invalid.