Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Extreme hardship

  • 18 Mar 2022

    香港特別行政區 訴 王敏馨

    Citation
    [2022] HKCFI 684
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA519/2021

    The magistrate misapplied the law by importing the Cap.374 'special reasons' standard and by treating 'extreme hardship' as the sole basis for exercising discretion under Cap.375 s8; on rehearing the High Court accepted that the 22‑year interval since prior disqualification is a legitimate factor to consider under s8 and, applying the correct legal test and facts, reduced the disqualification from 6 months to 5 months while rejecting the 'extreme hardship' contention and refusing admission of the discharge note as fresh evidence.

  • 26 Apr 1983

    KAM SHING KI v. FAN KAM AND OTHERS

    Citation
    KAM SHING KI v. FAN KAM AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV34/1983

    The Court of Appeal held that on the evidence the trial judge could reasonably find that no manifest injustice or inequity would result from making the possession order and that the appellate court should not interfere where a reasonable judge properly directing himself could reach that conclusion; therefore the appeal must be dismissed and the order for possession affirmed.

  • 3 Nov 1982

    KONG TAI SANG v. WONG KWOK NANG ANO OTHERS

    Citation
    KONG TAI SANG v. WONG KWOK NANG ANO OTHERS
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV113/1982

    Where a landlord or owner seeks possession under s.53(2)(b) and the facts demonstrate extreme hardship of the kind shown to the existing occupier, proviso (i) applies and the court is not obliged to grant an order for possession; such extreme hardship will justify refusing possession despite the owner's requirement.