Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fixtures and fittings

Legal area

Court

8 Jan 2013

寶寶集團控股有限公司對材庫(香港)有限公司

Citation

寶寶集團控股有限公司對材庫(香港)有限公司
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDPE1078/2012

Tenant ordered to pay rent arrears of HK$326,000 for the period 1 Oct 2012 to 30 Nov 2012; tenant not liable for claimed removal/clearing costs because external signage/air‑con frames were likely not tenant additions falling within lease removal obligation and interior partitions and fitout pre‑existed and were not proven to have been installed by the tenant without landlord consent; landlord may deduct the awarded rent from the security deposit and return any balance to tenant; no order for costs.
4 Nov 2011

TSANG YUEN MUI v. CHOI SIM CHING

Citation

TSANG YUEN MUI v. CHOI SIM CHING
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1347/2008

The Court found the parties held over as a month‑to‑month tenancy at HK$9,800 from 1 April 2007; the tenant failed to give the required one month notice so landlord was entitled to one month's rent in lieu (deductible from deposit); the premises were not properly reinstated and vacant possession was not delivered until 25 October 2007; under express covenants in the tenancy (clauses 10,13,14,17,18) the landlord was entitled to recover costs of reinstatement and prorated rent/fees for 1–25 Oct 2007, set off the deposit and recover the balance with interest and costs.
17 Jul 2009

TIMELESS SOFTWARE LTD v. GLORIOUS LTD

Citation

TIMELESS SOFTWARE LTD v. GLORIOUS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA151/2007

Clause 5.4 construed to require removal/reinstatement only of fittings, fixtures, alterations and additions installed by TSL in its capacity as tenant under the tenancy; fixtures permanently attached at time of sale passed to the defendant under the 'as-is' sale and s16(1) Cap 219, and the defendant's demand to reinstate to the original 2000 handover condition was not permitted; accordingly TSL was entitled to return of the deposit and the defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.
19 Mar 2003

WILSON COMMUNICATIONS LTD v. FORDEASE LTD

Citation

WILSON COMMUNICATIONS LTD v. FORDEASE LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ315/2002

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff failed to prove any oral agreement waiving reinstatement; the written lease governed, plaintiff breached Clauses 2 and 6 by removing fixtures without written consent, and the defendant was entitled under Clause 7 to deduct reasonable reinstatement costs and 13 days lost rent (deduction $73,139) from the deposit leaving $12,861 payable to plaintiff; defendant entitled to recover costs from 10 Feb 2002 to date of judgment.
28 May 2002

WONG WAI LIN LANA v. HEUNG WAH WING

Citation

WONG WAI LIN LANA v. HEUNG WAH WING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5083/1992

On the balance of probabilities the Memorandum dated 20 February 1992 was genuine, the house contents were delivered to the defendant, and the defendant has failed or refused to pay the agreed price of HK$500,000; judgement for the plaintiff for HK$500,000, with no interest awarded because of plaintiff's long delay, and costs (nisi) to the plaintiff.
6 Nov 2001

WONG HOI NUNG v. THE SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT

Citation

WONG HOI NUNG v. THE SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV521/2001

Goodwill claim rejected because no demonstrable profit trend and wage/rental proxy methods were unsatisfactory; forced sale losses must be awarded in full because resumption of the resumed lot caused closure of the entire business; construction/site improvement costs are non‑recoverable because works were unauthorized under the lease and loss was not caused by resumption; cross‑appeal on profit rent dismissed and tribunal unit rent calculation upheld.
24 Jul 2001

Hon Mei Hing t/a Wing Tat Iron And Steel Engineering v. The Secretary For Transport

Citation

Hon Mei Hing t/a Wing Tat Iron And Steel Engineering v. The Secretary For Transport
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDMR19/2000

Tribunal held applicant had a tenancy only in respect of the half-house and a licence over the open area; compensation limited to loss attributable to the portion of Lot 199 that was resumed (excluding government strips G1 and G2); profit rent calculated by estimating market rent for Lot, deducting actual rent/licence, capitalising at 13% over 7 years; goodwill assessed on total extinction basis with adjusted annual profit, 7 years purchase discounted at 20%; unauthorised structures and improvements in breach of lease are not compensable; forced sale values for plant/fixtures and stock used a…
13 Jan 1999

SMART INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD. v. TWINKLE STEP INVESTMENT LTD.

Citation

SMART INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD. v. TWINKLE STEP INVESTMENT LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV201/1998

Majority held that a purchaser is entitled at the precise moment of completion to ensure that vacant possession and agreed fixtures and fittings are delivered; vendor's refusal to allow such inspection at completion justified purchaser's refusal to complete and disposal was remitted for further issues to be determined.
28 Nov 1996

LEE Lam and Another v. Director of Lands

Citation

LEE Lam and Another v. Director of Lands
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDLR11/1995

Compensation is limited to losses attributable to the resumed premises; where item-specific attribution is impossible, one-third apportionment of the business as a whole is appropriate. Applying these principles the tribunal awarded goodwill HK$960,000 (HK$480,000 pa x multiplier 2), profit rent HK$57,500, machinery HK$625,300 (purchase cost less depreciation), fixtures and fittings HK$1,107,200 (quoted cost less 20% depreciation), totalling HK$2,750,000; costs HK$9,000 awarded and leave reserved for interest under s.17(3A).
20 Nov 1996

CHAN CHAW-MAN AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

Citation

CHAN CHAW-MAN AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDLR1/1995

Applicants entitled to compensation under s.10(2)(d) to restore business position; goodwill valued at HKD 2,250,000 using 1993/94 taxable profit as base adjusted to HKD 750,000 and applying a multiplier of 3; profit rent assessed at HKD 89,000; equipment, fixtures and fittings accepted from respondent's expert valuation at HKD 1,496,915 less specified exclusions and auction proceeds resulting in HKD 1,445,865; miscellaneous costs allowed as pleaded; total compensation determined at HKD 3,900,000 with leave reserved for interest and costs order nisi of HKD 12,000.