CHAN HING AND OTHERS v. LAI KWONG AND OTHERS

CHAN HING AND OTHERS v. LAI KWONG AND OTHERS

The court found rectification not proved and that the parties had agreed clause 2(j) remain with an assurance that written consent to sublet would be readily given if sought; the first defendant nonetheless sublet the whole premises without written consent, committing a breach that entitled the plaintiffs to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CHAN HING AND OTHERS v. LAI KWONG AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: CHAN Hing; Plaintiff: CHAN Bing-chiu; Plaintiff: TAM Ying-chun; 1st Defendant: LAI Kwong; 2nd Defendant: WONG Kwok-cheung trading as Wang Lee Piece Goods Company; 3rd Defendant: Yee Chung Company (a firm)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 July 1978
Case Number
HCA1343/1977
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant / Possession Proceeding / Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiffs
Legal Topics
Subletting, Forfeiture of Tenancy, Waiver by Acceptance of Rent, Rectification of Contract, Consent to Underlet, Mesne Profits
Source Language
en
Property Law Contract Equity Landlord and Tenant Law Subletting Forfeiture of Tenancy Waiver by Acceptance of Rent Rectification of Contract +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN Hing

Plaintiff

CHAN Bing-chiu

Plaintiff

TAM Ying-chun

Plaintiff

LAI Kwong

1st Defendant

WONG Kwok-cheung trading as Wang Lee Piece Goods Company

2nd Defendant

Yee Chung Company (a firm)

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant / Possession Proceeding / Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the written Tenancy Agreement reflected the true common intention of the parties and was susceptible to rectification by deleting clause 2(j)
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant validly sublet the premises in breach of clause 2(j) requiring landlord's written consent
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs, by accepting rent after the subletting, waived the right to forfeit the tenancy

Ratio Decidendi

The court found rectification not proved and that the parties had agreed clause 2(j) remain with an assurance that written consent to sublet would be readily given if sought; the first defendant nonetheless sublet the whole premises without written consent, committing a breach that entitled the plaintiffs to forfeit. The plaintiffs did not have actual knowledge of the subletting amounting to waiver when rent was accepted, so forfeiture was valid; therefore judgment for plaintiffs for possession, forfeiture of the deposit and mesne profits with costs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiffs

Orders

  • Possession granted to plaintiffs against 1st defendant
  • Possession granted to plaintiffs against 2nd and 3rd defendants