Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Private nuisance

  • 12 Feb 2026

    PANG SAN SOR v. WAN KUI CHUEN

    Citation
    [2026] HKDC 231
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ5588/2025

    On the pleaded facts the plaintiff established entitlement to default judgment and both prohibitory and mandatory injunctions; where the defendant has defaulted and the plaintiff lacks access to the defendant's unit, a mandatory order requiring the defendant to carry out all necessary works to remedy the defects is sufficiently precise and appropriate; costs follow the event and are summarily assessed at HK$100,000.

  • 5 Feb 2026

    SAM HEI TAI HING FOODS CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF WAFORD INDUSTRIAL BUILDING

    Citation
    [2026] HKCFI 781
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1417/2019

    The Deed of Mutual Covenant permits the IO to designate loading/unloading areas and to make house rules subject to reasonableness; the plaintiffs failed to establish estoppel by convention from alleged long usage; the IO's ban on forklifts, one‑way traffic rule and use of barriers were within the IO's reasonable management powers except for the additional bar installation which was targeted and unreasonable; both sides engaged in unreasonable conduct amounting to private nuisance and only nominal damages are appropriate; injunctive reliefs claimed by either side are denied and costs reserved…

  • 27 Feb 2025

    黃錦賢 對 蕭玉良及另一人

    Citation
    [2025] HKDC 292
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ5107/2017

    Defendants were precluded from adducing expert or witness evidence for quantification because they failed to comply with the court's directions; plaintiff's expert evidence and contractor quotation were found credible and showed reasonable reinstatement cost; plaintiff entitled to reinstatement damages of HKD440,000; furniture and appliances claims lacked documentary corroboration and were dismissed; defendants jointly and severally liable for HKD440,000 plus interest from 16 November 2017 at HSBC prime +1% until judgment then at judgment rate; defendants to pay plaintiff's costs and plaintif…

  • 30 Dec 2024

    HENZULEA MARIAN NICOLAE v. YAO LIQIONG

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 2144
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ2131/2024

    On the pleadings the plaintiff established a common intention constructive trust due to a clear common intention and detrimental reliance (sole payment of mortgage and expenses) and it would be unconscionable for the defendant to deny the plaintiff's beneficial interest; service was validly effected under the substituted service order and the defendant defaulted, therefore the court in its discretion entered default judgment granting a declaration of constructive trust, an order for transfer, permanent injunctive relief, assessment of damages and costs.

  • 18 Jul 2024

    LEE LING LING LILIAN v. THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF WONG SIU YING ANNE, DECEASED

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 1152
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ3611/2020

    The court accepted the plaintiff's uncontested evidence and the Joint Office nuisance notice identifying the defendant's bathroom as the source of the seepage; excluded an expert report for lack of leave; assessed recoverable heads by reference to documented quotations and reasonable estimates: repair costs awarded on the produced contractor quotation, cleaning and electrician accepted as reasonable, hotel accommodation awarded based on contemporaneous online rate produced, and a conventional sum awarded for prolonged non-pecuniary harm. Therefore damages for nuisance were awarded to the plai…

  • 21 May 2024

    SHUM CHUN TUNG v. TO YING LAM AILEEN AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 795
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ2785/2022

    The application for an interlocutory injunction was refused because plaintiff failed to produce objective contemporaneous evidence demonstrating the alleged nuisance continued after 4 October 2023; oral assertions at the bar lacked weight; the proposed abatement measures were unproven and there was a real risk the injunction would unduly infringe the defendant’s enjoyment of her flat; accordingly the balance of convenience favoured refusal and costs were ordered against the plaintiff.

  • 26 Mar 2024

    KAN LAI LING v. WONG MAN KIT

    Citation
    [2024] HKDC 459
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ5594/2018

    On the primary issue the plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that Flat 608 was the source of water seepage into Flat 508; key expert evidence relied upon by the plaintiff was either inadmissible (the unilateral 3 October 2020 report) or insufficiently reliable (infrared/microwave/ECS/dye/flow tests lacked calibration, controls or yielded inconclusive results), and the defendant cooperated with investigations and inspections; accordingly the defendant is not liable and the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

  • 30 Aug 2023

    YEUNG YIK CHUN v. WONG LAI MING AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    [2023] HKDC 1160
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ2004/2019

    On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the plaintiff's expert evidence that Affected Area A was caused by leakage from defective freshwater facilities and defective waterproofing in the defendants' bathroom and Affected Area B was caused by defective flooring and waterproofing of the defendants' balcony; defendants had actual or constructive knowledge of the seepage from repeated complaints and Joint Office involvement and therefore were liable for breach of the Deed of Mutual Covenant, negligence and private nuisance; appropriate remedies and damages were awarded accordingly.

  • 24 Aug 2023

    DOUBLE PROOF LTD v. HO KWOK WING

    Citation
    [2023] HKDC 1128
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ5753/2019

    The defendant was bound by the DMC and Sub‑DMC and, on the evidence, knew of and accepted the Pipe serving Toilet 4A through Unit 4B; her removal/blocking of the Pipe in July 2019 unlawfully interfered with plaintiff's contractual and Wheeldon v Burrows quasi‑easement and breached the DMC/Sub‑DMC and constituted nuisance, entitling the plaintiff to a mandatory injunction to reinstate the Pipe and a prohibitory injunction against further interference; the defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.

  • 31 Mar 2023

    好安樓業主立案法團 v. LEUNG KAM CHUNG KENNETH

    Citation
    [2023] HKLdT 26
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDBM129/2020

    Photographic evidence established that the respondent stored personal belongings in adjacent common areas and thus is prohibited from storing items in common areas under s34I and the DMC; however, storage inside the demised car park, while a change of use, was not shown to be a nuisance or to involve hazardous/combustible materials and the DMC did not expressly prohibit storage, so the applicant's claim to remove items and reinstate the car park was dismissed; injunctive relief must be proportionate and the appropriate remedy was a prohibition against occupying common areas rather than orderi…