LIN HEUNG TEA HOUSE & BAKERY (a firm) v. CORAL KING LTD.

LIN HEUNG TEA HOUSE & BAKERY (a firm) v. CORAL KING LTD.

No oral renewal agreement was concluded because the person present on behalf of the Tenant did not have authority to bind the firm on the crucial term of rent; the Landlord waived any right to reinstatement by its conduct and correspondence and therefore cannot claim mesne profits for occupation during reinstatement; the Landlord is nevertheless entitled to recover management services on a quantum meruit assessed at $1,616 per month totaling $53,328; the Tenant is entitled to return of the $150,000 deposit and agreed repayments of government rent and rates; costs ordered nisi to the Tenant.

Citation
LIN HEUNG TEA HOUSE & BAKERY (a firm) v. CORAL KING LTD.
Parties
Tenant; Plaintiff in HCA 19563/98; Defendant in HCA 9849/98: Lin Heung Tea House & Bakery (a firm); Landlord; Defendant in HCA 19563/98; Plaintiff in HCA 9849/98: Coral King Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 June 2000
Case Number
HCA9849/1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Landlord and Tenant Dispute (forfeiture; Deposit Recovery; Quantum Meruit) / Re Trial Judgment (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Judgment for the Tenant on principal issues (no oral renewal; deposit return; repayment of rates/government rent). Landlord succeeds on quantum meruit for management services in part.
Legal Topics
Forfeiture, Renewal of Tenancy, Oral Agreement, Authority of Agent, Reinstatement, Waiver, Mesne Profits, Quantum Meruit, Management Fees, Company Representation by Director, Costs
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Contract Property Civil Procedure Equity Forfeiture Renewal of Tenancy Oral Agreement +8 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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lin Heung Tea House & Bakery (a firm)

Tenant; Plaintiff in HCA 19563/98; Defendant in HCA 9849/98

Coral King Limited

Landlord; Defendant in HCA 19563/98; Plaintiff in HCA 9849/98

Procedural Posture

Civil Landlord and Tenant Dispute (forfeiture; Deposit Recovery; Quantum Meruit) / Re Trial Judgment (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral agreement to renew the tenancy was concluded in November 1997
  2. 2 Whether reinstatement was required and whether landlord waived reinstatement requiring tenant to undertake works
  3. 3 Whether landlord entitled to mesne profits for period of reinstatement

Ratio Decidendi

No oral renewal agreement was concluded because the person present on behalf of the Tenant did not have authority to bind the firm on the crucial term of rent; the Landlord waived any right to reinstatement by its conduct and correspondence and therefore cannot claim mesne profits for occupation during reinstatement; the Landlord is nevertheless entitled to recover management services on a quantum meruit assessed at $1,616 per month totaling $53,328; the Tenant is entitled to return of the $150,000 deposit and agreed repayments of government rent and rates; costs ordered nisi to the Tenant.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Tenant on principal issues (no oral renewal; deposit return; repayment of rates/government rent). Landlord succeeds on quantum meruit for management services in part.

Orders

  • Landlord to pay Tenant $150000 being return of the rental deposit
  • Landlord to pay Tenant $2292 being repayment of Government rent