Siu Wai Keung v. Herminia Lao Jez

Read the full judgment text of LDNT 662/1998 on BabelCite. This LDNT judgment was delivered on 30 November 1998.

1. This is an application by the tenant Siu Wai Keung (A), for a new tenancy of the premises at Flat 11-B, Parkview Mansion, No.3, Lau Sin Street, Causeway Bay. The Respondent landlord (R) opposes the application on the grounds that the tenant has caused unnecessary annoyance, inconvenience or disturbance to the landlord. R complained that A was often in arrears of rent, and that there was a history of unfriendly relationship between the parties.

Remarks: On appeal by the Respondent to the Court of Appeal: Appeal dismissed. Please refer to appeal judgment CACV000333/1998.
Case No.LDNT 662/1998
Court
LDNT
Date30 Nov 1998
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

>LDNT000662/1998

IN THE LANDS TRIBUNAL OF

THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

Lands Tribunal Application No. LDNT 662 of 1998

________________

SIU WAI KEUNG (Applicant)
AND
HERMINIA LAO JEZ (Respondent)

________________

Coram : Deputy Judge LEE

Dates of Hearing : 30 November 1998

Date of Judgment : 30 November 1998

Date of Reasons for Decision : 24 December 1998

_____________________

REASONS FOR DECISION

_____________________

1. This is an application by the tenant Siu Wai Keung (A), for a new tenancy of the premises at Flat 11-B, Parkview Mansion, No.3, Lau Sin Street, Causeway Bay. The Respondent landlord (R) opposes the application on the grounds that the tenant has caused unnecessary annoyance, inconvenience or disturbance to the landlord. R complained that A was often in arrears of rent, and that there was a history of unfriendly relationship between the parties.

2. R sought to terminate the tenancy by a notice of termination in the specified form CR101 (Exhibit A1). This was dated 17th June 1997, and notified the tenant that the tenancy would be terminated on 31st December 1998. It is clear that the CR101 was wrongly dated. A agreed that he did receive this CR101, and responded on 13th August1998 by issuing another specified form CR102 (Exhibit A2), stating that he would not be willing to give up the possession of the suit premises. A form CR105 (Exhibit A3), dated 7th September, 1998, was issued by R, requiring the tenant to apply to the Lands Tribunal for the grant of a new tenancy. A then brought the present application.

3. During the hearing it was clear that the CR101 (Exhibit A1) was wrongly dated to be issued on 17th June 1997, and as such invalid. R accepted that, but alleged that she had shortly thereafter, on discovering the mistake, amended the date on the CR101 to read 17th June 1998, and sent it by fax to A on 18th June, 1998. R did not send it by post, and there was no evidence of any other mode of service. A denied ever receiving the second CR101 (Exhibit R3).

4. Under Section 119 (1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance Cap.7 the landlord may terminate a tenancy by notice given to the tenant in the specified form CR101. Cap.7 is one of the Ordinances under which matters may be submitted to the Lands Tribunal for determination. Rule 7 (1) (b) of the Lands Tribunal Rules provides that :

"Service of a document required to be served on any person may be effected, if the person is not acting by a solicitor, by delivering it to him personally or by leaving it for him or sending it by ordinary post addressed to him at the address for service, or if none is given, at his last known or usual place of abode or business in Hong Kong..."

5. There is no provision for service by fax.

6. As the first CR101 (Exhibit A1)was not valid, and the second CR101 (Exhibit R3) had not been properly served, the A's application for a new tenancy was dismissed.

H. M. LEE
Presiding Officer
Lands Tribunal

Representation:

The Applicant in person.

The Respondent represented by Madam LI LAO, Rosita.






Remarks:
On appeal by the Respondent to the Court of Appeal: Appeal dismissed. Please refer to appeal judgment CACV000333/1998.