Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Certificate of compliance

Legal area

Court

1 Mar 2022

CHAU SO MAN SUE v. CHOW WAI FONG ALICE

Citation

[2022] HKDC 206
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5648/2018

Vendor failed to discharge duty to show good title by refusing to produce the approved carpark layout plan; an old Certificate of Compliance does not discharge that duty; non-registration does not excuse the vendor from making reasonable enquiries and producing the approval plan; omission of the Covenant in the prior assignment did not affect title; vendor repudiated the Formal Agreement and plaintiff validly rescinded and is entitled to return of deposits with interest and costs.
28 Nov 2018

LIU SIU SHUM v. LIU TONG, LIU WAI KEUNG and LIU CHOK YIU EDMUND as the managers of LIU SHIU FONG TSO

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2570
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2520/2015

The Agreement on its true construction carried an implied obligation that the defendant act within a reasonable time to obtain CCs; the defendant failed to act within a reasonable time and therefore breached the Agreement but that breach did not go to the root of the contract and did not amount to repudiation accepted by the plaintiff; accordingly the plaintiff’s claim for a declaration of termination and damages failed and the defendant’s counterclaim for specific performance was refused as inappropriate in the exercise of the court’s discretion.
6 Aug 2015

CHAN YAU v. CHAN CALVIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHAN YAU v. CHAN CALVIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV202/2014

The Court held the agreements were illegal and unenforceable because they required the 2nd defendant, a mere nominee with no beneficial interest, to make a statutory declaration that he was the 'sole owner' when Government policy at the material time required sole legal and beneficial ownership; the plaintiff and 1st defendant knew this and were equally at fault, so restitution and contractual remedies are barred; the certificate of compliance did not waive Government rights and proportionality did not justify recovery where illegality was intrinsic to performance.
5 Jun 2015

CHEUNG FUK YU DANNY AND ANOTHER v. VU POI VAN

Citation

CHEUNG FUK YU DANNY AND ANOTHER v. VU POI VAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2817/2013

Leave to appeal was refused because the defendant failed to establish an arguable case with a reasonable prospect of success: the court had properly considered the DLO and BD documents and found unresolved risk of enforcement by the BD, and the defendant could not raise unpleaded out-of-time arguments at the leave stage; accordingly payment of HK$290,000 was ordered to be paid out to the plaintiffs and costs to plaintiffs on a party-and-party basis.
11 Oct 2013

SUN CROWN TRADING LTD v. HOLYROOD LTD

Citation

SUN CROWN TRADING LTD v. HOLYROOD LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV64/2012

On the proven facts the developer left substantial outstanding construction works and conducted extensive post-conveyance building operations that rendered the development a construction site for about three years; that use crossed the permissible line and constituted an actionable nuisance causing loss of rental income; the implied term that flats be fit for 'luxurious' living was rejected as unnecessary and too vague, but rectification costs to bring flats to conformity with Schedule 5 of the SPA were awarded.
1 Mar 2012

GATEWAY INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LTD v. HOLYROOD LTD

Citation

GATEWAY INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LTD v. HOLYROOD LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1159/2007

The court found the defendant liable: the Certificate of Compliance under Clause 4(7) did not negate the developer's express and implied contractual obligations (including an implied term that units be fit for luxurious residential use), the extensive post-conveyance works were outstanding contracted works (not mere upgrades) that created a continuing construction site amounting to actionable nuisance and breach of SPA and DMC; plaintiffs awarded damages for loss of rental, rectification costs, interest and indemnity costs.
21 Jun 2011

TRILLION HOLDINGS LTD v. HOLYROOD LTD

Citation

TRILLION HOLDINGS LTD v. HOLYROOD LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1162/2007

The court refused to strike out paragraph 14 because the Defendant had not shown the pleading was bound to fail; the Certificate of Compliance did not, as a matter of pleading at this stage, conclusively defeat the Plaintiffs' contractual claim that communal facilities were not provided in a usable state; late supplemental witness statements and expert reports were largely admitted where they related to pleaded matters or familiar complaints but unpleaded detailed defects were ordered to be pleaded by amendment within fixed time limits; the court imposed costs orders (including indemnity cost…
21 Jun 2011

SUN CROWN TRADING LTD v.HOLYROOD LTD

Citation

SUN CROWN TRADING LTD v.HOLYROOD LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1158/2007

The court refused to strike out para.14 because it was not bound to fail on the construction of the contract and factual issues required trial; the court admitted several late witness statements and supplemental expert reports because they repeated or expanded pleaded matters and experts' reports, but required unpleaded complaints to be pleaded by amendment within fixed deadlines and imposed strict timetabled responses and costs sanctions; one proposed amendment lacking particularity was disallowed as it failed to inform the defendant of the case to be met.
16 Dec 2008

SUN LAI FONG KELLER v. LEUNG WING KIT AND ANOTHER

Citation

SUN LAI FONG KELLER v. LEUNG WING KIT AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1066/2007

Because no occupation permit or equivalent document was produced and there was no evidence that the Building Authority had condoned the contravention or that enforcement was beyond reasonable doubt, the Vendors failed to show good title and the deposit must be returned.
31 Jan 2008

MINCHEST LTD v. LAU TSUI KWAI AND OTHERS

Citation

MINCHEST LTD v. LAU TSUI KWAI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV12/2007

Section 14(2) deems that compliance with conditions precedent in pre-1 January 1970 Conditions of Grant occurred on 1 November 1984 and, by operation of s.14(1), that deemed compliance both converted the equitable interest into a legal estate and deemed the issue of a Government lease for the purposes of s.42 and any other law (including statute, common law and equity); accordingly production of a Certificate of Compliance was not necessary to prove title and the vendors had shown good title.