Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Private tenancy allowance

  • 19 Nov 2021

    香港特別行政區 訴 黃淑珍及另一人

    Citation
    [2021] HKCA 1736
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC14/2020

    On the facts the Court of Appeal acquitted D1 because the trial judge's inferences that she must have known of D2's reportable housing benefit were inadequately founded and alternative explanations (including private communications) were not excluded; D2's appeal was dismissed because objective and subjective elements of dishonesty were established: employer documents, payroll history and D2's admissions showed the payments were housing benefits and he knew the PTA double‑benefit rule and acted dishonestly to procure PTA, intending to deceive the Treasury and causing loss to the Government.

  • 1 Mar 2005

    HKSAR v. SZETO LOK KI AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    HKSAR v. SZETO LOK KI AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC191/2003

    The Court held that "financial interest" must be given its ordinary, contextual meaning and that on the facts the second applicant (and effectively the first by knowledge) had a beneficial/financial interest in the property despite the artifice; illegality of the underlying scheme did not negate the existence of that interest for the purposes of the PTA regulation, so the statements in the PTA application were false and leave to appeal against conviction was dismissed.

  • 11 Jul 1994

    R. v. LAW SHEUNG PING

    Citation
    R. v. LAW SHEUNG PING
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA256/1994

    The appeal was allowed because the trust instrument dated 26 June 1987, relied on by the magistrate, was executed after the critical date and the court had not given sufficient weight to other documentary and oral evidence which created a lurking doubt as to whether the appellant had a financial interest or was dishonest on 22 May 1987 and in January 1990; convictions were therefore unsafe and were quashed.

  • 17 Sept 1984

    ELVERA KWONG MAN LING v. RAYMOND K. HUNG AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    ELVERA KWONG MAN LING v. RAYMOND K. HUNG AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDLA292/1984

    The Tribunal held that the Commissioner's advisory figures under the Private Tenancy Allowance scheme are internal administrative advice and not an exercise of statutory powers under Cap.7 and therefore carry no evidential weight unless the Commissioner is called; subjective factors such as tenancy allowance eligibility and landlord mortgage obligations are irrelevant to the objective determination of prevailing market rent; applying weight to the respondents' expert comparables with a modest allowance for corner influence the Tribunal fixed the prevailing market rent at $4,400 per month from…