Great Eastern Life Assurance Company Ltd v Ng Hui Lip

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judgment Date: 17 April 1984
• Date: 17 April 1984
• Docket Number: District Court Appeal No 70 of 1979,Civil Appeal No 17 of 1983
• Court: High Court (Singapore)

Great Eastern Life Assurance Co Ltd

Plaintiff

and

Ng Hui Lip

Defendant

[1983] SGHC 23

A P Rajah J

District Court Appeal No 70 of 1979

High Court

Landlord and Tenant–Creation of tenancy–Contract–Rent-controlled premises–Landlord issuing notice to quit in order to increase rent–Whether tenant became contractual tenant at new rent–Section 7 Control of Rent Act (Cap 266, 1970 Rev Ed)

The plaintiff, the landlord, sued the defendant, their tenant, for recovery of the ground floor of the premises. The district judge dismissed the landlord's claim. The landlord appealed. The main issue was whether a notice to quit given under s 7 of the Control of Rent Act (Cap 266, 1970 Rev Ed) (“s 7”) with the express purpose of increasing the controlled rent in respect of controlled premises operated ipso facto to create a statutory tenancy.

Held, dismissing the appeal:

A notice to quit given under s 7 did not operate ipso facto to create a statutory tenant. Further, the decisions referred to by the landlord were not relevant to the Control of Rent Act and the appeal was dismissed: at [6] and [7].

Chiang Yik Mun v CYC Shanghai Shirt Co Pte Ltd [1981-1982] SLR (R) 556; [1982-1983] SLR 307 (refd)

Davies v Bristow [1920] 3 KB 428 (refd)

Great Eastern Life Assurance Co Ltd v Goh Ah Kow (trading as Singapore Dry Cleaners) [1979-1980] SLR (R) 334; [1978-1979] SLR 589 (refd)

Shuter v Hersh [1922] 1 KB 438 (refd)

Syed Hussain Alkaff v Teo Ee Hup [1981-1982] SLR (R) 672; [1982-1983] SLR 122 (refd)

Teo Ee Hup v Syed Hussain Alkaff [1981-1982] SLR (R) 384; [1982-1983] SLR 267 (refd)

Control of Rent Act (Cap 266, 1970Rev Ed)s 7 (consd)

Kirpal Singh (Kirpal Singh & Co) for the appellant

Lim Joo Hock (Lim Joo Hock & Co) for the respondent.

A P Rajah J

1 This is an appeal by the plaintiff company (appellant) against a judgment of a learned district judge whereby the [judge] dismissed the appellant's claim for recovery of the ground floor of the premises known as 202 Orchard Road and mesneprofits. The petition of appeal was filed on 28 April 1980 and the appeal came on for hearing before me on 2 April 1982. Mr Kirpal Singh appeared for the appellant and Mr Lim Joo Hock for the respondent.

2 Sometime before this appeal came before me I had on 25 October 1979 in Great Eastern Life Assurance Co Ltd v Goh Ah Kow (trading as Singapore Dry Cleaners) [1979-1980] SLR (R) 334 and again on 21 January 1980 in Teo Ee Hup v Syed Hussain Alkaff [1981-1982] SLR (R) 384 held that a notice to quit under s 7 of the Control of Rent Act (Cap 266) (“the Act”) did not ipso facto operate to bring about a statutory tenancy within the meaning of the Act.

3 At this hearing counsel for the appellant applied for an adjournment on the basis that one of the points to be argued in the appeal before me - whether a notice to quit given under s 7 of the Control of Rent Act (Cap 266) with the express purpose of increasing the controlled rent in respect of controlled premises operated ipso facto to create a statutory tenancy - was then under appeal before the Court of Appeal...