NGAN CHOR YING ANN and Another v. YEAR TREND DEVELOPMENT LTD. and Another

NGAN CHOR YING ANN and Another v. YEAR TREND DEVELOPMENT LTD. and Another

The High Court holds that the Building Management Ordinance and its Tenth Schedule do not, by express words or necessary implication, vest exclusive jurisdiction in the Lands Tribunal; accordingly the High Court retains jurisdiction to enforce a deed of mutual covenant and grants declaratory relief and an injunction...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
NGAN CHOR YING ANN and Another v. YEAR TREND DEVELOPMENT LTD. and Another
Parties
First Plaintiff: NGAN CHOR YING ANN; Second Plaintiff: CROWN CHARM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED; First Defendant: YEAR TREND DEVELOPMENT LIMITED; Second Defendant: CENTALINE PROPERTY AGENCY LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 January 1995
Case Number
HCA10337/1994
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Declaration and Injunction Under Deed of Mutual Covenant and Building Management Ordinance / Summons Hearing Under Orders 14 and 14 a (interlocutory)
Outcome
Order granted in terms of paragraphs 1, 2(a), 3 and 4 of the summons dated 29 November 1994; paragraph 2(b) refused as too wide; costs ordered nisi in favour of plaintiffs
Legal Topics
Deed of Mutual Covenant, Exclusive Use Covenant, Injunction, Jurisdiction of Lands Tribunal Vs High Court, Tenant Mix, Enforcement of Restrictive Covenants
Source Language
en
Property Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Statutory Interpretation Building Management Deed of Mutual Covenant Exclusive Use Covenant Injunction +3 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NGAN CHOR YING ANN

First Plaintiff

CROWN CHARM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED

Second Plaintiff

YEAR TREND DEVELOPMENT LIMITED

First Defendant

CENTALINE PROPERTY AGENCY LIMITED

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim for Declaration and Injunction Under Deed of Mutual Covenant and Building Management Ordinance / Summons Hearing Under Orders 14 and 14 a (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Lands Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction over matters in the Tenth Schedule of the Building Management Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the defendants are prohibited by the deed of mutual covenant from carrying on a real estate agency in shops 17 and 18
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs are estopped or precluded from relief by failure to enforce covenant against other breaches

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court holds that the Building Management Ordinance and its Tenth Schedule do not, by express words or necessary implication, vest exclusive jurisdiction in the Lands Tribunal; accordingly the High Court retains jurisdiction to enforce a deed of mutual covenant and grants declaratory relief and an injunction restraining the defendants from operating a real estate agency in shops 17 and 18 because the defendants knowingly took the commercial risk of breaching the covenant and damages are inadequate.

Court Disposition

Order granted in terms of paragraphs 1, 2(a), 3 and 4 of the summons dated 29 November 1994; paragraph 2(b) refused as too wide; costs ordered nisi in favour of plaintiffs

Orders

  • Declaration that the defendants are not entitled to carry on business as real estate agents in shops 17 and 18 of the building
  • Injunction restraining the defendants from carrying on a real estate agency business in shops 17 and 18