Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Valuation of land

Legal area

Court

14 May 2026

VAMPIO LTD v. LAI YUK LEONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKDC 836
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4644/2018

The court declares that the succession under Memorials 72787 and 72788 was on a per capita basis so that the parties' respective shares are those set out in Ratio (1); physical partition is impracticable; however the Plaintiff failed to establish that it had no other remedy to rid itself of co-ownership and accordingly the court refuses to make an order for sale under the Partition Ordinance; costs ordered nisi as specified.
17 Jul 2015

KO NGA CHUN v. COMPANHIA DE DESENVOL VIMENTO WUI SAN LIMITADA AND ANOTHER

Citation

KO NGA CHUN v. COMPANHIA DE DESENVOL VIMENTO WUI SAN LIMITADA AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA277/2012

The application was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to show that the proposed valuation expert evidence was relevant to the live issues pleaded and therefore did not satisfy the burden under O.38 r.36; accordingly leave to adduce the valuation report was refused and costs were awarded to the defendants.
13 Jan 2015

LAI SIU WAI LOUIS lawful attorney of 譚翠好 v. INCORPORATED OWNERS OF QUEEN’S PARK

Citation

LAI SIU WAI LOUIS lawful attorney of 譚翠好 v. INCORPORATED OWNERS OF QUEEN’S PARK
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1276/2012

Plaintiff is ordinarily resident outside Hong Kong and does not have substantial fixed assets in Hong Kong readily realizable for costs; defendants failed to prove address change was to evade litigation; plaintiff's claim is genuine but not highly likely to succeed; in all circumstances it is just to order security for costs of HK$532,845 to be paid into court within 28 days, with further proceedings stayed and dismissal if security not provided.
22 Jul 2010

TAKCO LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

TAKCO LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA196/2007

The court found only the general policy representation (Government commitment to recycling) was made but rejected the critical representations that the user of the 3rd Premises would remain unchanged absent planned development; accordingly the 2006 Tenancy Agreement governed occupation, Takco breached its user covenant by conducting ferrous metal recycling, the 2nd Notice to Quit was valid, the Government was entitled to vacant possession and mesne profits were assessed at HKD 237,500 per month.

Hong Kong Case Law

VAMPIO LTD v. LAI YUK LEONG AND OTHERS

KO NGA CHUN v. COMPANHIA DE DESENVOL VIMENTO WUI SAN LIMITADA AND ANOTHER

LAI SIU WAI LOUIS lawful attorney of 譚翠好 v. INCORPORATED OWNERS OF QUEEN’S PARK

TAKCO LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE