Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Certainty of term

Legal area

Court

10 Apr 2015

市區重建局對良友印刷廠有限公司

Citation

市區重建局對良友印刷廠有限公司
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDPE1177/2014

The lease term was certain and expired on 26 November 2014; the respondent's alleged oral indefinite renewal was legally ineffective for lack of certainty; the Lands Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate URA compensation/resumption matters; consequently the respondent had no reasonable arguable case to justify a stay of execution and the non-regular review application was dismissed, permitting execution of the possession and seizure warrants.
4 Jun 2014

TSE SHUI YING, THE SOLE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF NG KA MUK, DECEASED v. NG CHOI FAR

Citation

TSE SHUI YING, THE SOLE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF NG KA MUK, DECEASED v. NG CHOI FAR
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4862/2013

The court refused summary judgment and declined to determine the legal question under Order 14A because the defendant’s proposed defence—that the uncertain tenancy might be treated as a life tenancy or otherwise raises a real and non‑frivolous point about the applicability of Berrisford in Hong Kong’s leasehold regime—is arguable and requires mature consideration at trial; accordingly the defendant is given unconditional leave to defend and procedural directions were made.
17 Jul 2013

古信誠對捷衡有限公司

Citation

古信誠對捷衡有限公司
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDPE331/2013

The Tribunal concluded the 2011 written lease validly replaced the earlier agreement and expired on 31 March 2013; the respondent failed to prove non‑service, fraud or any lawful basis to overturn the decision; the review grounds had no real prospect of success and the original 19 June 2013 decision was upheld.
16 Sept 1996

GUOJI TRANSPORT CO LTD v. THE COLLECTOR OF STAMP REVENUE

Citation

GUOJI TRANSPORT CO LTD v. THE COLLECTOR OF STAMP REVENUE
Court

District Court
Case number

DCSA30/1995

The agreement constituted a lease because it granted exclusive possession of specific units, imposed obligations and liabilities consistent with a tenancy, involved substantial consideration tied to occupation and investment, and satisfied the certainty requirement because the maximum duration was limited by Guoji's leasehold interest; accordingly the agreement was chargeable to stamp duty under Head 1(2)(a) on the stated consideration of HK$11,033,561.83 producing duty of HK$303,424.

Hong Kong Case Law

市區重建局 對 良友印刷廠有限公司

TSE SHUI YING, THE SOLE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF NG KA MUK, DECEASED v. NG CHOI FAR

古信誠 對 捷衡有限公司

GUOJI TRANSPORT CO LTD v. THE COLLECTOR OF STAMP REVENUE

市區重建局對良友印刷廠有限公司

古信誠對捷衡有限公司