Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Rent recovery

  • 20 Feb 2023

    CHUN HING TIMBER CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. JOYCE EMPIRE LTD

    Citation
    [2023] HKDC 235
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ4045/2019

    The Lands Department's written warning dated 25 March 2019 made clear the defendant's works extended to adjoining land and required rectification including demolition; that formal notice triggered clause 15 permitting the defendant to determine the lease; the termination notice sent to the plaintiffs' solicitors was validly served and received; vacant possession of the plaintiffs' land was not shown to have been delivered, so the defendant was entitled only to return of the rental deposit of HK$120,000 and not the rent paid in advance; costs awarded to defendant on party and party basis and i…

  • 14 Dec 2021

    陳雲及另一人 對 振威金屬有限公司及另二人

    Citation
    [2021] HKCFI 3667
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1824/2013

    The application for a stay of execution was refused because the applicant's grounds were incorrect or unarguable: the defendants' counterclaim targeted the first plaintiff only; the limitation defenses were not pleaded or relied on at trial and could not properly be raised at this enforcement stage; the judgment correctly identified the first plaintiff as liable for rent, rates, government rent and mesne profits; and a stay would be unjust given the prolonged unlawful occupation and significant arrears, so the applicant failed to show an arguable appeal that would justify a stay.

  • 2 Jun 2021

    福全發展有限公司 對 蔡漢群

    Citation
    [2021] HKDC 583
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ3759/2016

    The court found plaintiff held title and was a bona fide purchaser without notice of any enforceable proprietary interest claimed by defendant; defendant failed to discharge the burden of proving payment of HK$70,000 or an enforceable proprietary right and failed to prove continuous rent payments by balance of probabilities; even if an oral agreement existed it would at most create a contractual licence not binding on the purchaser; accordingly plaintiff was entitled to immediate vacant possession and the rent claim failed.

  • 4 Aug 2020

    LIU JINCHENG v. MICHAEL PETER SCHMIDT

    Citation
    [2020] HKLdT 28
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDPD2239/2019

    The tenancy was validly terminated by the applicant's two months notice served on 25 September 2019 by an agent with ostensible authority; the respondent remained in occupation after termination and therefore became a trespasser liable for mesne profits; the tenant was not entitled to unilaterally deduct rent because the tenancy expressly prohibited deductions and common law does not imply a right to set off absent an express term; limited concessionary abatement was permitted by the Tribunal but did not excuse liability from January 2020 onwards; the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain…

  • 28 Sept 2018

    李建開 對 沈維佳

    Citation
    [2018] HKLdT 78
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDPE582/2018

    Leave to appeal was refused because the respondent's new argument that occupation breached the land covenant had no real prospect of success in overturning the Tribunal's judgment given established authority that covenant breaches do not automatically defeat landlord's rights and because the container structures were shown to have been approved by the Lands Department.

  • 9 Apr 2014

    MALICO DEVELOPMENT LTD 對 藍松

    Citation
    MALICO DEVELOPMENT LTD 對 藍松
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ3106/2011

    法庭裁定被告須將其自承租人處於2009年4月起收取且承認屬於公司的租金交還原告；被告未能就其主張之扣減項目履行舉證責任，故不准扣減；基於被告未經授權收取及不交還租金，且致使原告招致内地訴訟費用，被告須支付合計人民幣342,646元（或繳付時等值港幣）及港幣7,260元，另就入稟日至判案書日及判案書日至付款日計利息，反申索駁回，訟費由被告負擔（詳令）。

  • 4 Jun 2013

    WONG HANG FONG 對 NG YIN KEI

    Citation
    WONG HANG FONG 對 NG YIN KEI
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDPD760/2013

    Landlord breached the covenant of quiet enjoyment by actions relating to the gate on 28 March 2013 allowing the tenant to terminate the lease; however, defects and lack of stamp did not entitle tenant to withhold rent. Rent remained payable up to 27 March 2013; reduced mesne profits applied for the period from 28 March and, after power cut on 6 April, a lower market value for interim occupation applied until the premises were returned. As applicant's possession application was founded on conduct after landlord's breach, the application is dismissed.

  • 27 May 2013

    ZHOU JIANMEI 對 CHEUNG MOON HOI JEFF 及另一人

    Citation
    ZHOU JIANMEI 對 CHEUNG MOON HOI JEFF 及另一人
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDPD1549/2012

    The Tribunal refused leave to appeal because the respondents' grounds relied on factual disagreements or legal points already correctly decided: the Tribunal properly concluded it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the respondents' damages claim which did not seek possession under s8(d), and the proposed appeal had no reasonable prospect of success under s11AA(6).

  • 16 May 2013

    劉淑芳 對 黃林秀

    Citation
    劉淑芳 對 黃林秀
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDPD224/2013

    The tribunal found the respondent's grounds were primarily factual and did not demonstrate legal error or a reasonable prospect of success under s11AA(6); no other fairness reasons existed to warrant an appeal hearing or stay; therefore leave to appeal and the stay were refused, the non-standard review dismissed, and enforcement of the possession order was restored with no costs ordered.