Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Prevailing market rent determination

Legal area

Court

24 Jun 2003

PACIFIC KNIGHT LTD v. GOLDEN CROWN RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

PACIFIC KNIGHT LTD v. GOLDEN CROWN RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDNT208/2002

Tribunal selected the three most relevant comparables (Nos.1,5,6), adopted the expert's adjustment methodology for size and age, used Private Domestic Rental Indices for time adjustment, rejected an additional downward adjustment for the adjacent construction site because the adverse effects were not apparent to the market at the valuation date, adjusted Comparable 6's effective rent by averaging the landlord's received sum and the tenant's effective payment to reflect the inducement, calculated an average adjusted unit rent of $252.9/sq.m. applied to the Premises (240.8 sq.m.) to determine P…
12 Nov 2001

GEORGE COLIN MAGNUS & ANOTHER v. LEE CHONG ESTATES LTD.

Citation

GEORGE COLIN MAGNUS & ANOTHER v. LEE CHONG ESTATES LTD.
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDNT162/2001

The Tribunal fixed the prevailing market rent for the two year tenancy commencing 1 July 2001 at HK$49,000 per month (exclusive of rates and management fees). It did so by adopting the direct comparison method, rejecting the 1st and 7th comparables as outliers, accepting time adjustments per the Rating & Valuation Department indices, applying a 0.25% per floor adjustment by floor number, accepting a lump sum deduction/addition for fixtures and chattels (fixed at HK$2,000 for the subject and HK$1,500 for certain comparables), deducting HK$2,500 for covered parking where applicable, applying a…
5 Jan 2001

New System Ltd. v. China International Reinsurance Co. Ltd.

Citation

New System Ltd. v. China International Reinsurance Co. Ltd.
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDNT313/2000

The Tribunal selected Comparable 1 as the best comparable (one floor above and identical saleable area), applied a 1% downward adjustment for floor level and a 12% overall downward adjustment for defects (rejecting the applicant's 20% and the respondent's 5%), and rejected the 10% fittings adjustment because the tenant had accepted the floor condition in Exhibit R2; on that basis PMR for the new tenancy was fixed at $64,400 per month and the Tribunal ordered the new tenancy and ancillary amendments.
28 Jun 2000

John James Toohey v. Hero Plaza Ltd.

Citation

John James Toohey v. Hero Plaza Ltd.
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDNT60/1999

The Tribunal accepted the direct comparison method but rejected reliance on a single comparable; it averaged adjusted unit rates from four nearby 23 Tung Shan Terrace comparables to derive an average adjusted unit rate of $244.45/sq.m., applied that to an equivalent area of 85.24 sq.m. (flat plus terrace valued at one eighth of the flat) to compute a monthly rent of $20,837, added a car parking allowance of $2,300 to reach $23,137 and rounded to $23,000 per month as the prevailing market rent effective 1 July 1999, and ordered a two-year new tenancy on that basis.
15 May 1985

CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD v. WHARF PROPERTIES LTD

Citation

CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD v. WHARF PROPERTIES LTD
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDLA51/1985

The Tribunal fixed prevailing market rents by applying net unit rates derived from recent comparable lettings within Harbour City, adding the customary $3 per sq.ft. for airconditioning, water heating and management to arrive at inclusive rents; no deduction was made for defects common to the comparables, but unique defects would require deduction; Craigie Court was held marginally superior to Barnton Court and unit and floor differentials were reflected in the rates awarded.

Hong Kong Case Law

PACIFIC KNIGHT LTD v. GOLDEN CROWN RESTAURANT LTD AND ANOTHER

GEORGE COLIN MAGNUS & ANOTHER v. LEE CHONG ESTATES LTD.

New System Ltd. v. China International Reinsurance Co. Ltd.

John James Toohey v. Hero Plaza Ltd.

CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD v. WHARF PROPERTIES LTD