28 Mar 2025
GOLDEN KEY INDUSTRIAL LTD 對 THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF WAH CHUN INDUSTRIAL CENTRE及另一人
- Citation
- [2025] HKLdT 10
- Court
- Lands Tribunal
- Case number
- LDBM125/2022
[2025] HKLdT 10
Hong Kong Case Law
Common parts maintenance
5 Feb 2024
KO PHILIP ZHI YAO v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF HAMBURG VILLA
- Citation
- [2024] HKDC 178
- Court
- District Court
- Case number
- DCCJ5363/2020
The court found water seepage existed in the plaintiff's bedroom; after excluding the guest bathroom and B5 stairwell as probable sources on the evidence, the court held the source was leakage from the external walls of the Lightwell; the IO had notice and failed to take reasonable steps to remedy and to engage with the plaintiff, thereby breaching duties under the BMO and the DMC; damages were assessed at HK$173,648 and judgment entered for the plaintiff with interest and a costs order nisi for half costs against the IO.
3 Oct 2023
POON YUK YING SUSANNA 對 THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KIN YICK MANSION
- Citation
- [2023] HKLdT 59
- Court
- Lands Tribunal
- Case number
- LDBM295/2019
Applicant proved the unit experienced leakage during 2014–2022 and that the external wall was one of multiple sources; the IO was notified (including government reports) of possible wall defects by mid‑2015 yet failed to investigate or repair in a timely or reasonable manner; that failure constituted a breach of the statutory duty under BMO s.18(1)(a) and caused loss recoverable as damages. The injunction was refused because subsequent repairs removed the external wall as a continuing source.
14 Aug 2006
LAU CHUN WING ROD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF PO ON BUILDING
- Citation
- LAU CHUN WING ROD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF PO ON BUILDING
- Court
- District Court
- Case number
- DCCJ762/2004
Court found the Defendant breached its statutory duty under section 18 of the BMO and was negligent by approving burial of the flush water pipe and failing to investigate and properly maintain the rooftop and parapet; expert testing by the Plaintiff's expert established water ingress via holes/cracks at parapet and along the embedded pipe, the Defendant's black-tar/internal renovation theories were rejected for lack of evidence, and the continuing leakage constituted a nuisance; accordingly Plaintiff entitled to injunction, declaration and damages (to be assessed).