12 -
Wednesday, May 10, 1972
Although their Lordships had disagreed with the contention that
a reasonable rent must of necessity be something different from the full
market rent, Mr. Woo pointed out, it was extremely important to note that, in saying that the two things need not necessarily be something different, their Lordships had made it equally plain that the two things need not
necessarily be the same.
Their Lordships had said: "It must be obvious that whether a
or 'fair' depends upon the nature and
full market rent is reasonable'
+
condition of the market."
NEW CASE
Should a new case be brought before the Privy Council, the
Appellant would be able to show without any difficulty at all that the nature and condition of the market in Hong Kong today was grossly abnormal; so much so that the market rent could not possibly be regarded as fair and reasonable, he said.
Mr. Woo stressed that the market was one in which prices were forced up to extremely high levels by shortage of land the commodity
which was being auctioned and the value was not a fair and reasonable value but was a "greatly inflated scarcity" value.
Each case had to be judged on its own merits and it might well be contended by a future litigant that the true market value had been inflated by circumstances, he added.
These circumstances could be the boom in the conditions in Hong Kong at the time, land speculation, or even the very system adopted by the Government of "selling" leases might have caused the rents to be "highly unreasonable" when based upon the market arrived at by competition at land
auctions, Mr. Woo pointed out.
"The ther