Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Sham tenancy

  • 30 Dec 2010

    HOLLYWOOD PALACE CO LTD v. TRANS-GLOBAL HONG KONG INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    HOLLYWOOD PALACE CO LTD v. TRANS-GLOBAL HONG KONG INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP151/2010

    The court found the 1st Defendant's defence to be shadowy: there was no satisfactory evidence that Advance China acted as the Plaintiff's agent, the Tenancy Agreement was not shown to be a sham, and no irrevocable licence or estoppel was made out; given the high test for interim payment and the risk that the 1st Defendant may be unable to satisfy a judgment, it was sensible and desirable to order interim payment of mesne profits of HK$6,500,000 (HK$500,000 per month for 13 months) and ongoing monthly interim payments of HK$500,000 until possession or further order.

  • 3 Sept 2007

    HKSAR v. FUNG KING MAN, VIRGINIA

    Citation
    HKSAR v. FUNG KING MAN, VIRGINIA
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC511/2006

    Convictions for furnishing false information under s19(1)(b) were upheld because the evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that the stipulated rents and receipts were false in a material particular given the common intention between applicant and PW8 that the stipulated rent would not be payable; there was insufficient basis to find the applicant was agent liable to account to PW8; sentencing was reduced in exercise of appellate discretion to reflect time served resulting in immediate release.