NG MEI CHUN v. CHENG MING AND ANOTHER

DCCJ3728/2007

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3728 OF 2007

----------------------

---------------------

------------------------------------------

ASSESSMENT  OF  DAMAGES

------------------------------------------

1.  Interlocutory judgment in this case was obtained on 11 December 2007 in default of Notice of Intention to Defend.  This hearing is on the assessment of damages.

Background

2.  The plaintiff is the owner of Flat A, 21st Floor, Block 10, Fontana Heights Phase 2, situated at 100 Castle Peak Road, Tsing Lung Tau, New Territories (hereinafter referred to as “the said property”).  The 1st and 2nd defendants were and are the registered owners of Flat A, 22nd Floor, Block 10 of Fontana Heights, the same block of flats.  The defendants’ flat happened to be one floor above the plaintiff’s flat.

3.  In June 2006, the plaintiff, Miss Ng, decided to let out the said property.  She inspected the property and found the ceiling of the master bedroom bathroom stained and leaking causing the ceiling paint to peel and staining the ceiling.  She lodged a complaint with the management office and the management office immediately wrote to the defendants at the 22nd A, notifying them of the water leakage and requesting them to repair the leakage.  They also notified the Food and Environment Health Department of the problem.

4.  The leakage seemed to have subsided in the months that followed and there was no further action taken.  In late November 2006, the plaintiff found the bathroom ceiling leaking again.  She lodged a further complaint with the Food and Environment Health Department and she also instructed solicitors to write to the defendants complaining about the leakage and demanding damages to be paid to her.

5.  At around the same time, she decided to release the said property to estate agents for letting out.  In May 2007, she received an offer from a prospective tenant at a rental of $9,000 per month.  However, the prospective tenant decided against proceeding with the lease on 24 June 2007 due to the leakage at the bathroom of the master bedroom.   Eventually, Miss Ng had her ceiling repaired after her father managed to persuade the workmen who happened to be working at the defendants’ flat to repair the leakage in the master bedroom bathroom, as a result of which, there were no further leakages.  Miss Ng was eventually able to let out the said property on 20 October 2007. 

6.  Miss Ng obtained a valuation of rental report from a firm of surveyors, Messrs Lawson David and Sung on 11 March 2008 for the purpose of the present assessment proceedings.  At today’s hearing, I have heard evidence from Miss Ng herself and the evidence of Mr Wong from the surveyor firm, Lawson David and Sung, who had prepared the report.

7.  I accept the evidence of both, in particular, the valuation of $8,700 per month rental of the said property assessed by the surveyor which I found to be fair and reasonable.  Miss Ng’s current tenant is in fact paying a monthly rental of $9,000 to her.  I accept Miss Wing’s submission that for the 10 months the property was left unlettable due to the damage done by the leakage caused by the two defendants, the plaintiff’s loss is assessed at $8,700 for a period of 10 months, totalling $87,000.  I will grant interest from the date of the writ to the date of judgment at half judgment rate and thereafter at full judgment rate.  I also grant costs to the plaintiff to be borne by the defendants, to be taxed if not agreed.