Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Compensation/damages

Legal area

Court

29 May 2003

YEUNG BEE LEE, BILLY v. HKSAR

Citation

YEUNG BEE LEE, BILLY v. HKSAR
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV195/2002

Leave to appeal was refused because the order for security for costs was made in accordance with established principles and supported by authority; the applicant failed to demonstrate any matter of great general or public importance under s.22(1) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, and the prior decision (including dismissal of CACV282/1998) covered the applicant and found no valid claim to monetary compensation, so no basis existed to grant leave.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV326/1998

The 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; residents remained permittees under the Resettlement Ordinance with permits terminable on notice and there was no unconscionable conduct by the Government justifying estoppel or damages in judicial review; accordingly the appeals fail and no appellant had a valid claim to monetary compensation arising from the 1961 statements.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV325/1998

The Court held the 1961 communications did not create proprietary or perpetual rights and did not encourage an objectively justified belief of ownership; subsequent occupation permits, terminable on notice, and the imprecision of the statements precluded proprietary estoppel or unconscionability sufficient to bar revocation. Consequently there was no private law basis for damages and no entitlement to relief by way of judicial review beyond that. The appeals were dismissed.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV342/1998

The 1961 communications did not create any proprietary interest or irrevocable licence; residents remained permittees whose occupancy was governed by occupation permits and the Resettlement Ordinance; the Housing Authority's notices to quit were valid and not an unlawful abuse of power; consequently no applicant had entitlement to damages arising from the 1961 statements and the appeals fail.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV281/1998

The 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; residents remained licensees under the Resettlement Ordinance and occupation permits terminable on notice; the notices to quit were valid; there was no private law basis for damages in these judicial review proceedings and the consolidated appeals fail.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV324/1998

The 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; residents remained licencees under occupation permits governed by the Resettlement Ordinance which were terminable on notice; there was no unconscionable inducement sufficient to ground proprietary estoppel preventing revocation nor to sustain damages via judicial review; accordingly applicants had no entitlement to the monetary relief sought and the appeals are dismissed.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV293/1998

The 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; residents remained permittees under the Resettlement Ordinance whose permits were terminable; the notices to quit were valid; there was no unconscionable conduct giving rise to proprietary estoppel and no private law cause of action supporting damages in judicial review; appeals dismissed.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV28/1999

The Court held the 1961 communications did not create proprietary or irrevocable rights; residents remained permittees under the Resettlement Ordinance with permits terminable on notice; there was no sufficient inducement, reliance or unconscionability to ground proprietary estoppel or entitlement to damages; the Housing Authority's notices to quit were valid and the appeals therefore fail.
27 Sept 1999

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV345/1998

The 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; residents remained licensees under occupation permits governed by the Resettlement Ordinance and terminable on notice; there was no unconscionable conduct or proprietary estoppel sufficient to bar revocation or to ground damages; the Notices to Quit were valid; therefore appellants had no entitlement to damages and the appeals were dismissed.