SHAHDAN LTD. v. WONG KOK SAN

SHAHDAN LTD. v. WONG KOK SAN

Master found the Plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to relet Shop Unit 2011 and that the Plaintiff's decision to demolish Phase I was the operative cause depriving Phase II of access from Nathan Road; consequently damages were recoverable only for the period 1 February 1994 to 30 June 1994, monthly rent fixed at the mean of valuations ($27,450.00), the Defendant was not entitled to refund of the rental deposit, and total damages of $153,337.50 were awarded with interest and costs on an indemnity basis.

Citation
SHAHDAN LTD. v. WONG KOK SAN
Parties
Plaintiff / Landlord: Shahdan Limited; Defendant / Tenant: Wong Kok San
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 May 1996
Case Number
HCA1038/1994
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant Possession and Damages Assessment / Assessment of Damages (post Judgment)
Outcome
Damages awarded to Plaintiff in the sum of $153,337.50; interest at judgment rate from date of decision until payment; costs of the assessment to Plaintiff on an indemnity basis with a certificate for counsel; rental deposit not refundable to Defendant.
Legal Topics
Breach of Tenancy Agreement, Mitigation of Loss, Novus Actus Interveniens / Remoteness, Rent Quantum Assessment, Set Off and Deposit Retention
Source Language
EN
Contract Property Landlord and Tenant Remedies Damages Breach of Tenancy Agreement Mitigation of Loss Novus Actus Interveniens / Remoteness Rent Quantum Assessment +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shahdan Limited

Plaintiff / Landlord

Wong Kok San

Defendant / Tenant

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant Possession and Damages Assessment / Assessment of Damages (post Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord took reasonable steps to mitigate loss in re-letting the premises
  2. 2 Whether the landlord's decision to demolish Phase I constituted a novus actus interveniens rendering later damages too remote
  3. 3 Whether the tenant's rental deposit should be set off or deducted from damages awarded

Ratio Decidendi

Master found the Plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to relet Shop Unit 2011 and that the Plaintiff's decision to demolish Phase I was the operative cause depriving Phase II of access from Nathan Road; consequently damages were recoverable only for the period 1 February 1994 to 30 June 1994, monthly rent fixed at the mean of valuations ($27,450.00), the Defendant was not entitled to refund of the rental deposit, and total damages of $153,337.50 were awarded with interest and costs on an indemnity basis.

Court Disposition

Damages awarded to Plaintiff in the sum of $153,337.50; interest at judgment rate from date of decision until payment; costs of the assessment to Plaintiff on an indemnity basis with a certificate for counsel; rental deposit not refundable to Defendant.

Orders

  • Award damages to Plaintiff in the sum of $153,337.50
  • Interest on total damages from date of decision at the judgment rate until payment