Casenote

LEUNG TSANG HUNG AND LEE WAI YU v . THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF KWOK WING HOUSE , HKSAR FACV4 /2007Background of the caseA utilization of concrete which fell over from the Kwok Wing House draw resulted in death of a hawker Madam Liu Ngan Fong Sukey . The slicing of concrete had been detached from the balcony of flat number 11 .The verbal expression was old .The building plans showed that it was an open balcony with a concrete rear above it . The canopy , which was the result of the death , was extended astir(predicate) cardinal five years back while walls and windows were installed to lay in the balcony . The person behind this installation was not knget . The show up indicated that the workmanship was poor . The judge found both the endure and the geters liable moreover dismissed the displaceion against the integrate d possessors nicety Bokhary PJThe legal expert stated that owners can not be held responsible as they had no knowledge of such a dangerMr Justice Chan PJHe gibe with Justice BokharyMr Justice Ribeiro PJHe found the tenants and the owner accountable only when dismissed the action against the structured owners with costsReasonsThe Judge reasoned that the incorporated owners had no right of possession , occupation or sidestep over the buildingMy AnalysisHistory and Courts ReasoningIdentify the key rightfulness considered by the courtBackground and development of the applicable constabularyExplain how the court applied precedent to the factsOutline how the courts reasoning fits with historyLogically group paragraphs to hold forth separate issuesBe objective . Do not include your own opinionKeeping in reference the context of the case , the common rectitude offense governing accountability for earthly concern release was considered . besides the principle is currently under development a unwashed agreement was! not present regarding it .

Any count which dexterity involve the threat to lives , safety , wellbeing , assets or entertain of the people or create hindrances in each well-grounded rights of the people of the state is considered to be a popular evil or by the approval of Lord Bingham of Cornhill in R v Rimmington [2006] maybe referred to as the nuisance lay on the line . The valuable point to reflect on was the point to the highest degree the relevance of this law in this case , that was proven since the owner failed to put forward by his responsibilities thus ended up in such a case . According to the abroad Tankship UK [1967] it is reasonable to act upon the public nuisance principle when an exclusive loss is greater than the public loss therefore this law has been taken as the key by the court in this caseThe law differs concerning the public private aspect . Private nuisance is concerned fundamentally with the owner or tenant s actions mayhap impairing the welfare of the space belonging to or occupied by another individual . The nuisance hazard must be responsible for a loss or injury to the fellowship in to be considered by the court The principle may be considered however if the...If you want to get a complete essay, order it on our website: OrderEssay.net

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay