This means that the duty of care before concluding a “how is, where is” the agreement is an absolute must. This property is sold by the seller and accepted by the buyer on the basis of “As Is, Where Is”. The buyer based his assessment on his own investigations and judgments: the condition of the property; The location of the building (including, but not limited to all interventions and/or mischaracterizations); The title charges (excluding mortgages, letters or reserves that must be discharged when or by settlement); and the requirements of each competent authority; and herehein waives any right they have under the contract or anything else to terminate the contract or to demand damages from the seller or a related party in connection with the above business. The buyer then found an intervention in the property, which was identified as a wood store between a neighbouring lot 3310 and lots 223-224. The buyer tried to revoke the contract and repay the 10% down payment. The sellers replied that the purchaser had no right to return from the agreement, as the seller`s obligation to deliver the property illegally should not be met until after completion and any intrusion would be lifted on or before the completion date. While the “how is” condition may seem a little unfair to the buyer, it actually corresponds to the traditional common law notion of “caveat emptor,” which literally means “to pay attention to the buyer.” Therefore, it is entirely appropriate to include a condition “as intended” in an agreement to sell and acquire real estate, provided that it is agreed between the parties to include it. Subsequently, the seller and buyer entered into a formal agreement in which the illegal structural clause was amended to include only the first part of the clause, namely “the property is sold on the basis of `as is`” (the “As Is” clause). The result was one of the questions posed by the Court of Justice as to whether the “As Is” clause alone could prevent the purchaser from invoking requirements or objections to illegal structures or other property issues. You can see why allowing you to buy a property on a “how is where is” is a serious decision for any buyer. They have no choice but to accept the physical condition of the accommodation, as it is at the time of the conclusion of the purchase, even if the condition of the accommodation has deteriorated considerably since the date of the booking form or offer to purchase. In our previous newsletter “Raising Requisitions in the Context of Discrepancies Found in Provisional and Formal Agreements,” we discussed the decision of the Court of Join Union Investment Ltd/China Tree Investment Ltd  2 HKLRD 901 regarding, among other things, the involvement of different formulations used in a preliminary agreement and a subsequent formal agreement regarding unauthorized construction work in the property.
In this newsletter, we will discuss another issue that was raised in this case on the legal effect of an “as is” clause. It is therefore apparent from the CA decision in the Huang Ching Hwee/Heng Kay Pah case that the general legislation relating to real estate in the use of land remains applicable. One of the main consequences of this approach is that the courts will continue to set out the contractual provisions of these agreements in order to comply with established principles and rules (including the reserve rule) on the land.