Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Option to renew lease

Legal area

Court

24 Aug 2015

POLYKOTE COATINGS MANUFACTURING CO LTD v. GRACE REHABILITATION CENTRE LTD

Citation

POLYKOTE COATINGS MANUFACTURING CO LTD v. GRACE REHABILITATION CENTRE LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1477/2013

Where an option to renew contains no provision limiting the time for exercise, the court will construe the agreement against the presumed intention of the parties and, absent facts indicating a contrary intention, the option falls with the original tenancy and must be exercised during the currency of that tenancy; further, the Defendant's solicitors' letter of 8 August 2013 was an expression of intention and an invitation to negotiate terms, not an unequivocal exercise of the option, so the Defendant had no defence to the claims for vacant possession and outstanding rent and summary judgment…
20 Apr 2007

MICRO POWER LTD v. MASTER PROFIT CORPORATION LTD

Citation

MICRO POWER LTD v. MASTER PROFIT CORPORATION LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1764/2006

The court found a genuine and credible dispute of fact as to whether the plaintiff actually received the defendant's notice; because credibility and factual inference are matters for trial, summary judgment under Order 14 is inappropriate and the application must be dismissed. The specified mode of service in the lease does not necessarily render a notice invalid if actual receipt is established.
17 Aug 2005

BLOOMARK INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. YU YIM KEUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

BLOOMARK INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. YU YIM KEUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5779/2002

The notice to extend was a valid exercise of the unilateral option and bound both defendants; the tenancy agreement created an obligation for interim payments pending rent determination; the transfer to Mr Poon was not completed or approved by Management and therefore did not release D2; the agent lacked authority to effect a binding transfer so there is no equitable estoppel; resignation from partnership does not discharge liability absent an endorsed transfer; accordingly judgment for plaintiffs for the claimed sum with interest and costs follows.
18 Jan 1996

WELLMAKE INVESTMENTS LTD v. CHAN YIU TONG

Citation

WELLMAKE INVESTMENTS LTD v. CHAN YIU TONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV247/1995

Absent an express stipulation by the purchaser to give effect to the tenant's option, and where the option required protection by registration, a purchaser who relied on the statutory registration regime did not thereby use the statute as an instrument of fraud; the unregistered option was void against the purchaser and the appeal must be dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

POLYKOTE COATINGS MANUFACTURING CO LTD v. GRACE REHABILITATION CENTRE LTD

MICRO POWER LTD v. MASTER PROFIT CORPORATION LTD

BLOOMARK INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. YU YIM KEUNG AND ANOTHER

WELLMAKE INVESTMENTS LTD v. CHAN YIU TONG