VERDER & CO (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHES v. LI CHUN AND ANOTHER

VERDER & CO (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHES v. LI CHUN AND ANOTHER

The court found plaintiffs had a good arguable case against both defendants, the 1st defendant had facilitated and not remedied the wrongful user (including dishonoured payment), and the balance of convenience favoured granting interlocutory relief because of the real risk of re-entry by the Crown and inadequacy of defendants' evidence; accordingly interlocutory injunctions were granted and the 2nd defendant was ordered to remove vehicles within seven days.

Citation
VERDER & CO (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHES v. LI CHUN AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Verder & Company (Hong Kong) Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Sun Dah Timber Factory Limited; 1st Defendant: Li Chun; 2nd Defendant: Queen's Parking (Hong Kong) Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 March 1996
Case Number
HCA2140/1996
Procedural Posture
Civil (landlord and Tenant) / Interlocutory Injunction Hearing
Outcome
Interlocutory injunctions granted in favour of Verder & Company and Sun Dah against Li Chun and Queen's Parking (Hong Kong) Limited; 2nd Defendant ordered to remove vehicles; order nisi for costs granted in favour of plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Lease Covenants, User Restrictions, Waiver and Acquiescence, Interlocutory Injunction, Subletting, Notice to Undertenant, Risk of Forfeiture/re Entry
Source Language
EN
Land Law Equity Civil Procedure Contract Lease Covenants User Restrictions Waiver and Acquiescence Interlocutory Injunction +3 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 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Verder & Company (Hong Kong) Limited

1st Plaintiff

Sun Dah Timber Factory Limited

2nd Plaintiff

Li Chun

1st Defendant

Queen's Parking (Hong Kong) Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (landlord and Tenant) / Interlocutory Injunction Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants breached negative covenants in the head lease and sub-lease by operating a public car park and using premises for unauthorized purposes
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs were entitled to interlocutory injunctive relief against the 1st and 2nd defendants
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd defendant had notice of the negative covenants and whether plaintiffs had acquiesced or waived breaches

Ratio Decidendi

The court found plaintiffs had a good arguable case against both defendants, the 1st defendant had facilitated and not remedied the wrongful user (including dishonoured payment), and the balance of convenience favoured granting interlocutory relief because of the real risk of re-entry by the Crown and inadequacy of defendants' evidence; accordingly interlocutory injunctions were granted and the 2nd defendant was ordered to remove vehicles within seven days.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunctions granted in favour of Verder & Company and Sun Dah against Li Chun and Queen's Parking (Hong Kong) Limited; 2nd Defendant ordered to remove vehicles; order nisi for costs granted in favour of plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Interlocutory injunctions restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants from using the Lot and extension for purposes other than permitted under the Conditions of Grant and the leases
  • 2nd Defendant to remove all vehicles and goods from the Lot within 7 days from date of decision