Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Exercise of option

Legal area

Court

31 Mar 2026

JIL INVESTMENTS LTD v. JESUS IS LORD CHURCH LTD

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1119
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2689/2016

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the Written Notices dated 20 October 2015 were prepared contemporaneously and were served on Sy Senior at the meeting; Sy Senior had apparent authority despite resignation and bankruptcy because the Defendant lacked notice of termination and his prior conduct held him out as authorised; the Notice Requirement under Clause 12 was satisfied and the Option was validly exercised; completion could not occur by the expiry date because the Plaintiff was unable to perform (encumbrances and LSH borrowings) so time ceased to be of the essence and the…
20 Mar 2014

SIU KAI MING v. LAU SAI HING

Citation

SIU KAI MING v. LAU SAI HING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV143/2013

Clause III.5 of the 2006 Agreement operated as an option which was validly exercised by oral communication on 16 December 2007 within the extended period, but the defendant thereafter unequivocally abandoned that exercise by his solicitors' letter of 11 October 2008, a repudiatory act accepted by the plaintiff; accordingly the plaintiff was entitled to the relief granted below and the appeal was dismissed.
18 Mar 2014

PONY HK WORLD LTD v. VAND PETRO-CHEMICALS (BVI) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

PONY HK WORLD LTD v. VAND PETRO-CHEMICALS (BVI) CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV4/2013

The appellants succeeded on the issue that the respondent had not validly exercised the option; that principle had been argued below; there was no basis to depart from the general rule that costs follow the event; accordingly the order nisi that the respondent pays the appellants' costs in this Court and the courts below is made absolute and costs of submissions follow the event.
21 May 2012

SIU KAI MING v. LAU SAI HING

Citation

SIU KAI MING v. LAU SAI HING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2131/2008

Summary judgment was refused because material disputes of fact and law remained (authority for exercise, timing of exercise, validity of withdrawal, valuation and entitlement to damages) such that the defendant demonstrated triable issues; plaintiff proceeded despite knowledge of defences and therefore must pay costs to defendant.
8 Nov 2007

LAU SUK CHING PEGGY v. MA HING LAM AND OTHERS

Citation

LAU SUK CHING PEGGY v. MA HING LAM AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV360/2006

Clause 3 of the Minutes granted an option which had to be exercised strictly by tendering the purchase price on or before 28 September 2004; the plaintiff did not tender payment or validly exercise the option by that date, therefore no contract for sale arose and the claim for specific performance fails; the respondents' notice succeeds and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
31 Jan 1984

PACIFIC REALTY LTD v. LAM SAU MUI

Citation

PACIFIC REALTY LTD v. LAM SAU MUI
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDMP20/1983

The option in clause 4(i) was validly and unconditionally exercised by the tenant by notice in November 1979; payment of the increased rent was not a condition precedent to exercising the option; the duly exercised renewal created a further fixed three year term within the meaning of s74A(a) and accordingly Part II statutory machinery for increase of rent was excluded; the Commissioner's Certificate increasing rent under Part II is a nullity.

Hong Kong Case Law

JIL INVESTMENTS LTD v. JESUS IS LORD CHURCH LTD

SIU KAI MING v. LAU SAI HING

PONY HK WORLD LTD v. VAND PETRO-CHEMICALS (BVI) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

SIU KAI MING v. LAU SAI HING

LAU SUK CHING PEGGY v. MA HING LAM AND OTHERS

PACIFIC REALTY LTD v. LAM SAU MUI