16 May 2018
BEST VIEW MEDICAL CO LTD v. RICHERMEN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LTD
- Citation
- [2018] HKCA 288
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACV176/2017
Clause (1)(c) of Section V, by expressly providing for a refundable reinstatement deposit in relation to consent for works within the demised premises, precluded the landlord from demanding a nonrefundable reinstatement charge for such works; the landlord’s insistence on a nonrefundable charge for items found to be within the demised premises rendered its withholding of consent unreasonable and amounted to repudiatory breach, entitling the plaintiff to the return of the security deposit and justifying dismissal of the defendant’s counterclaim.