SQE Other ordinances in agency practice question: Cheung Wing-kei owns a Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flat

Answer: B. The agreement is void under section 17B, and Mr Cheung commits an offence under section 27A by purporting to enter into it

Answer: The agreement is void and Mr Cheung commits an offence. Section 17B makes a purported assignment or other alienation, together with any agreement to alienate, void where the owner acts in breach of the terms of the agreement for sale and purchase or assignment. Section 27A makes it an offence to purport to enter into such a void agreement (fine of HK$500,000 and imprisonment for 1 year). Why not the others: - Valid, premium recovered from the buyer later: The Schedule requires the premium to be paid before the restriction is lifted. A sale made in breach of it is void, not merely subject to a premium claim. - Voidable at the Authority's option: Section 17B says 'void', not voidable, and there is no 28-day period for the Authority to object. - Valid if completion is after the fifth anniversary: The breach happens when he agrees to alienate within the restriction period without meeting the Schedule's conditions. Delaying completion does not cure it. Rule: Alienating, or agreeing to alienate, an HOS flat in breach of the Schedule terms is void under section 17B and an offence under section 27A. Source: Housing Ordinance (Cap. 283), sections 17B(1) and 27A and Schedule paragraph 1; as at Oct 2026