Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Building management ordinance schedule 7

Legal area

Court

17 Jan 2022

CREATIVE PROPERTY SERVICES CONSULTANTS LTD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KING MING COURT

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 163
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2478/2017

The Court held Defendant liable to pay the outstanding management fees of HK$6,025,724.92; the Defendant failed to prove that the Plaintiff retained the Defendant's documents or breached duties to deliver them up; however funds remaining in the manager's Hang Seng bank account are held on a Quistclose trust for the Defendant and the Plaintiff must account for and return the sums currently standing in credit; the two claims are distinct and not to be automatically set off against each other.
14 Jan 2022

TAI CHEUNG MANAGEMENT CO LTD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF TUEN MUN CENTRAL SQUARE

Citation

[2022] HKLdT 3
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDBM49/2021

Clause 12(A)(a) of the DMC provides a legitimate, alternative mechanism to terminate the DMC manager; paragraph 7(1) of Schedule 7 is permissive and not the exclusive means of termination. Because clause 12(A)(a) does not frustrate the legislative purpose of Schedule 7 and in fact makes termination easier for owners, it is not inconsistent with Schedule 7 and therefore is effective to terminate the applicant's appointment.
6 Jun 2017

采建有限公司對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人

Citation

采建有限公司對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA16/2017

Leave to appeal was refused because the tribunal correctly found on the remitted facts that claimant provided management services, defendants were enriched by those services at claimant's expense, no valid change of position defence was established, and there was no legal error in proceeding on an unjust enrichment/quasi-contract basis or in the tribunal's handling of evidence; defendants failed to show an arguable appeal on law.
6 Jun 2017

采建有限公司對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人

Citation

采建有限公司對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA15/2017

The tribunal’s findings that the claimant provided management services during the relevant period, that the defendants accepted and benefited from those services without payment, and that the defendants failed to establish a change of position or to disprove the claimant’s accounts justified recovery on unjust enrichment/quasi-contract grounds; the rehearing did not misapply the law nor contravene the earlier High Court directions, so leave to appeal is refused.
18 Mar 2011

SINCERE LUCK INVESTMENT LTD v. MUI PIK HA AND ANOTHER

Citation

SINCERE LUCK INVESTMENT LTD v. MUI PIK HA AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4966/2007

The manager proved it provided management services and that the majority of challenged expenditures were legitimately incurred for Kamease Garden; any defect in compliance with Schedule 7 did not preclude recovery of actual deficits under the DMC contribution provisions; defendants are liable in proportion to management shares for the proven deficits; interest and costs awarded to the Plaintiff.
18 Mar 2011

SINCERE LUCK INVESTMENT LTD v. TANG MING YUI AND ANOTHER

Citation

SINCERE LUCK INVESTMENT LTD v. TANG MING YUI AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4965/2007

Court accepted that plaintiff provided management services and produced sufficient documentary and oral evidence that the majority of the claimed expenditures were properly incurred for Kamease Garden; the manager is entitled to recover proven deficits under the DMC notwithstanding alleged procedural non-compliance with Schedule 7; therefore judgment for proven deficits against the respective defendants apportioned according to management shares (174/786 and 132/786) with interest as provided in the DMC and costs nisi granted.

Hong Kong Case Law

CREATIVE PROPERTY SERVICES CONSULTANTS LTD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KING MING COURT

TAI CHEUNG MANAGEMENT CO LTD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF TUEN MUN CENTRAL SQUARE

采建有限公司 對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人

采建有限公司 對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人

SINCERE LUCK INVESTMENT LTD v. MUI PIK HA AND ANOTHER

SINCERE LUCK INVESTMENT LTD v. TANG MING YUI AND ANOTHER

采建有限公司對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人

采建有限公司對 YAN KWOK CHO及另一人