Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Notices to quit

Legal area

Court

9 Jul 2010

WAN PO JUN MARY PAULINE v. LIU CHAN AND LAM AND ANOTHER

Citation

WAN PO JUN MARY PAULINE v. LIU CHAN AND LAM AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA10/2010

The statement of claim was struck out because the plaintiff produced no evidence entitling her to remain in the property; the 2nd defendant, as executrix with probate, legitimately administered the estate and lawfully authorised issuance of notices to quit; no amendment could cure the claim's defects, therefore the claim was bound to 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

CACV328/1998

The 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; the residents only held occupation permits terminable under statute and contract, there was no unconscionable encouragement sufficient for proprietary estoppel, the notices to quit were valid and no private law cause of action for damages arose; appeals dismissed.
26 Nov 1998

CHOI LAI KAM v. TANG KAM CHOI

Citation

CHOI LAI KAM v. TANG KAM CHOI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4165/1997

The tenancy was of agricultural land (including dwelling occupied by persons working the land) and therefore not a protected tenancy under Part II; the 1979 Notices to Quit were valid and effective; no implied new tenancy arose because rent was not accepted after notice and there was no act implying consent; defences of laches, acquiescence and waiver fail because the Defendant's reliance was not induced by Plaintiff and Defendant had notice of the Notices; therefore Plaintiff entitled to possession, injunction, mesne profits at $200 per annum from 1 July 1980 and costs (nisi).
27 Jun 1996

KONG WAN v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

KONG WAN v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1972/1996

The June 1961 letters constituted a solemn governmental promise creating a legal licence/right for the residents who were living at Rennie’s Mill to occupy their cottages indefinitely; serving Notices to Quit in breach of those promises without recognizing them or offering compensation amounted to an abuse of power; the matter was justiciable by judicial review but the appropriate remedy was damages (not quashing the notices), and entitlement to damages is personal to those who resided there in 1961 and remain when assessed.
27 Jun 1996

HO YUEN PO and Others v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

HO YUEN PO and Others v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1927/1996

The June 1961 letters constituted a solemn government promise granting the residents a personal legal right/licence to occupy Rennie's Mill indefinitely; issuing Notices to Quit in breach of that promise amounted to an abuse of power; the appropriate remedy is damages (compensation) rather than injunctive relief or quashing the notices, and liability is personal to those resident in 1961 and still resident at Rennie's Mill.

Hong Kong Case Law

WAN PO JUN MARY PAULINE v. LIU CHAN AND LAM AND ANOTHER

TONG TIM NUI AND OTHERS v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

CHOI LAI KAM v. TANG KAM CHOI

KONG WAN v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

HO YUEN PO and Others v. HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY