第7部份：批租和租務事宜

Q1

美玲以每月租金$22,000向恒豐地產旗下物業東輝大廈8樓A室的業主建國承租一住宅單位，租期兩年。入住後數月，美玲發現單位外牆出現嚴重滲水，並導致室內牆身剝落，影響居住環境。建國拒絕維修，聲稱租約內並無列明其有維修外牆之責任，且滲水屬「日常損耗」。根據《業主與租客（綜合）條例》（第7章）第IV部有關住宅租賃的隱含契諾，下列哪項陳述最為正確？

Mei Ling rents a residential flat at Unit A, 8/F, Tung Fai Building — a property managed by Hang Fung Property — from landlord Kin Kwok at a monthly rent of $22,000 for a two-year term. Several months after moving in, Mei Ling discovers severe water seepage through the external wall causing interior plaster to peel off, seriously affecting her living conditions. Kin Kwok refuses to carry out repairs, claiming that the tenancy agreement contains no express clause imposing on him any obligation to repair the external wall, and that the seepage constitutes 'fair wear and tear'. Which of the following statements is MOST correct under the implied covenants for residential tenancies under Part IV of the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance (Cap. 7)?

• A. 建國的說法正確，因為業主只須負責在租約中明文列明的維修責任，隱含契諾不適用於私人住宅租賃。
• B. 根據第7章第IV部，業主對住宅租賃有隱含契諾，須負責維修及保養物業的結構及外部（包括外牆），不論租約有否明文列明，建國均有責任修葺滲水問題。
• C. 外牆滲水屬「日常損耗」，依法業主毋須負責；但若滲水影響單位內的固定裝置，則業主方須承擔維修責任。
• D. 根據第7章，業主的隱含維修責任僅限於公用地方（例如升降機及走廊），不涵蓋個別單位的外牆滲水問題。
• E. 美玲可即時終止租約並要求退還全部已繳租金，因為業主拒絕維修屬於根本性違約，但無權要求業主主動進行任何維修工程。

• A. Kin Kwok is correct. A landlord's repair obligations only arise from express contractual terms, and implied covenants do not apply to private residential tenancies.
• B. Under Part IV of Cap. 7, a landlord of a residential tenancy has an implied covenant to repair and maintain the structure and exterior of the premises (including the external wall). Kin Kwok is obliged to fix the water seepage regardless of whether the tenancy agreement expressly states so.
• C. Water seepage through external walls constitutes 'fair wear and tear' and the landlord is not legally required to remedy it; however, if the seepage damages fixtures inside the unit, the landlord would then be responsible.
• D. Under Cap. 7, the landlord's implied repair obligations are confined to common areas such as lifts and corridors, and do not extend to water seepage affecting the external wall of an individual unit.
• E. Mei Ling may immediately terminate the tenancy and claim a full refund of all rent paid because the landlord's refusal to repair constitutes a fundamental breach, but she has no right to compel the landlord to carry out any repair works.

顯示答案 / Show Answer

正確答案 / Correct Answer: B

• 根據《業主與租客（綜合）條例》（第7章）第IV部（尤其是第119ZB條），住宅租賃中存有法定隱含契諾，業主須負責維修及保養物業的結構及外部，不論租約內有否相關明文條款。
• 「日常損耗」的例外情況不能豁免業主修復結構性滲水缺陷的責任，因滲水源自外牆結構問題，而非租客使用造成的損耗。
• 隱含契諾具有法律約束力，業主不能以租約無明文規定為由拒絕履行；租客可循法律途徑強制業主履行維修責任。

• Under Part IV of the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance (Cap. 7) (in particular s.119ZB), residential tenancies carry a statutory implied covenant obliging the landlord to repair and maintain the structure and exterior of the premises, irrespective of whether the tenancy agreement contains any express provision to that effect.
• The 'fair wear and tear' exception does not exempt a landlord from repairing structural water seepage defects, since such seepage originates from structural deficiencies in the external wall rather than from deterioration caused by the tenant's ordinary use.
• Implied covenants are legally binding; a landlord cannot refuse to comply on the ground that the tenancy agreement is silent on the matter. The tenant may seek legal remedies to compel the landlord to perform the repair obligation.

Q2

建國（業主）與美玲（租客）於2023年6月1日就九龍彩虹道88號一個住宅單位簽訂租賃合約，月租為$18,000，租期兩年。美玲入住後發現單位內衛生設施嚴重失修，遂要求建國安排維修。建國以租約中訂有條款，列明「租客須自行承擔所有內部維修責任」為由拒絕。根據《業主與租客（綜合）條例》（第7章）第IV部的規定，下列哪項陳述最為正確？

Gin-kwok (landlord) and Mei-ling (tenant) signed a tenancy agreement on 1 June 2023 for a residential unit at Flat, 88 Choi Hung Road, Kowloon, at a monthly rent of $18,000, for a term of two years. After moving in, Mei-ling discovered that the sanitary facilities in the unit were in serious disrepair and requested Gin-kwok to arrange repairs. Gin-kwok refused, citing a clause in the tenancy agreement stating that 'the tenant shall be responsible for all internal repairs'. Which of the following statements is most correct under Part IV of the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance (Cap. 7)?

• A. 建國的立場正確，因為租約條款具有凌駕性效力，租客須自行承擔一切內部維修責任，包括衛生設施。
• B. 根據第7章第IV部，業主對住宅租賃物業的結構及衛生設施的維修保養負有隱含責任，而租約中排除此責任的條款對租客不具約束力。
• C. 美玲只可向租務審裁處申請裁定租金減免，而不能強制業主進行維修。
• D. 第7章第IV部的隱含責任只適用於月租低於$15,000的住宅單位，故本案不受保障。
• E. 美玲須先書面通知建國，並在其拒絕維修滿六個月後，方可向法庭申請救濟。

• A. Gin-kwok is correct, as the contractual clause is paramount, and the tenant is solely responsible for all internal repairs including sanitary facilities.
• B. Under Part IV of Cap. 7, the landlord has an implied obligation to keep the structure and sanitary installations of a residential tenancy in repair, and a clause in the tenancy agreement purporting to exclude this obligation is not binding on the tenant.
• C. Mei-ling can only apply to the Lands Tribunal for a reduction in rent and cannot compel the landlord to carry out repairs.
• D. The implied obligations under Part IV of Cap. 7 apply only to residential units with a monthly rent below $15,000, so this case is not protected.
• E. Mei-ling must first give written notice to Gin-kwok and wait six months after his refusal before applying to the court for relief.

顯示答案 / Show Answer

正確答案 / Correct Answer: B

• 根據《業主與租客（綜合）條例》（第7章）第IV部第119C條，在住宅租賃中，業主負有隱含責任，須保持物業的結構、外牆、共用設施及衛生設施處於良好狀態，此責任不得以租約條款排除。
• 任何租約條款若意圖排除或限制第7章第IV部賦予租客的法定保障，在法律上對租客不具約束力（第7章第119I條）。

• Under section 119C of Part IV of the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance (Cap. 7), a landlord has an implied covenant in a residential tenancy to keep the structure, exterior, common facilities, and sanitary installations in repair; this obligation cannot be excluded by the tenancy agreement.
• Any term in a tenancy agreement that purports to exclude or restrict the statutory protections conferred on the tenant by Part IV of Cap. 7 is not binding on the tenant (Cap. 7, s.119I).

Q3

租客偉業現租用九龍旺景道18號一個住宅單位，業主恒豐地產代理人建國向偉業提出在現有租約屆滿後，以高於現時租金35%的新租金續簽租約。偉業不同意該租金水平，並打算尋求法定途徑釐訂合理租金。根據《業主與租客（綜合）條例》（第7章）的相關規定，下列哪項陳述最為正確？

Wai Yip is currently renting a residential unit at 18 Wong King Road, Kowloon. The landlord's agent, Gian Gwok from Hang Fung Estate Agency, proposes that upon expiry of the existing tenancy, the new rent shall be 35% higher than the current rent. Wai Yip disagrees with this rent level and intends to seek a statutory mechanism to determine a fair rent. Under the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance (Cap. 7), which of the following statements is most accurate?

• A. 偉業可向土地審裁處申請，由審裁處根據市值租金原則釐訂新租金，審裁處的決定對雙方均具約束力。
• B. 偉業可向租務釐訂委員會申請釐訂租金，委員會將以申請日期前12個月內在同區同類單位的成交租金作為主要參考基準。
• C. 根據第7章第IV部的現行規定，受保障租客可向土地審裁處申請釐訂標準租金，但業主可同時申請以市值租金取代標準租金，兩者以較高者為準。
• D. 由於第7章的租金管制條款目前已全面廢除，偉業在法律上並無任何法定途徑要求獨立機構釐訂租金，只能與業主自行協商或選擇不續租。
• E. 偉業可向差餉物業估價署署長申請，由署長根據同區可比較物業的差餉租值釐訂合理租金，並頒發租金釐定証書。

• A. Wai Yip may apply to the Lands Tribunal, which will determine the new rent based on the market rent principle, and the Tribunal's decision shall be binding on both parties.
• B. Wai Yip may apply to the Rent Assessment Committee to determine the rent, using the transaction rents of comparable units in the same district within 12 months before the application date as the primary reference.
• C. Under the current provisions of Part IV of Cap. 7, a protected tenant may apply to the Lands Tribunal to determine a standard rent, but the landlord may simultaneously apply to substitute market rent for standard rent, whichever is higher.
• D. Since the rent control provisions of Cap. 7 have been fully repealed, Wai Yip has no statutory mechanism to request an independent body to determine the rent and can only negotiate privately with the landlord or choose not to renew.
• E. Wai Yip may apply to the Commissioner of Rating and Valuation to determine a fair rent based on the rateable value of comparable properties in the same district, and a rent determination certificate will be issued.

顯示答案 / Show Answer

正確答案 / Correct Answer: D

• 《業主與租客（綜合）條例》（第7章）前身的租金管制及釐訂委員會制度（包括標準租金及租務釐訂委員會）已於1990年代全面廢除，現行第7章不再設有針對私人住宅的租金管制機制。
• 現行第7章第IV部主要處理租賃的隱含契諾、沒收租賃權等事宜，並無賦予租客申請獨立機構釐訂市值租金的法定權利；租金水平須由業主與租客自由議定。
• 土地審裁處（第17章）雖可處理租賃糾紛，但其職能並不包括在租金管制框架外主動為私人住宅釐訂「合理市值租金」。

• The rent control and rent assessment committee system (including standard rent and the Rent Assessment Committee) under the predecessor provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance (Cap. 7) was fully abolished in the 1990s. The current Cap. 7 no longer provides any rent control mechanism for private residential premises.
• The current Part IV of Cap. 7 primarily deals with implied covenants in tenancies and forfeiture of tenancy; it does not confer on tenants any statutory right to apply to an independent body for determination of market rent. Rent levels are freely negotiated between landlord and tenant.
• Although the Lands Tribunal (Cap. 17) handles tenancy disputes, its functions do not include proactively determining a 'fair market rent' for private residential premises outside a rent control framework.