PERVEZ AKHTER v. JACKY CHAU KING YIN AND ANOTHER

PERVEZ AKHTER v. JACKY CHAU KING YIN AND ANOTHER

Conditions 3 and 5 of the Early Termination Agreement were not 'secondary' and imposed specific obligations including permission to remove items; Respondents failed to prove permission (breach of Condition 5) and provided insufficient evidence that fixtures/equipment were left and in working order (insufficient to satisfy Condition 3); acceptance of $35,000 and keys did not constitute waiver by conduct because the sum was part-payment of arrears and acceptance pre-dated the breach consequences; CCTV material did not meet Ladd v Marshall criteria and would not likely change the result; no arguable error of law was identified and consequently leave to appeal and stay were dismissed and...

Citation
[2026] HKLdT 21
Parties
Applicant: PERVEZ AKHTER; 1st Respondent: Jacky chau King yin; 2nd Respondent: anthony tsang ho lun
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 April 2026
Case Number
LDPE1575/2025
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant Possession and Arrears / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following Judgment
Outcome
Leave to appeal dismissed; application for stay of execution dismissed; costs of interlocutory application awarded to Applicant
Legal Topics
Repossession, Arrears of Rent, Early Termination Agreement, Breach of Contract, Waiver by Conduct, Leave to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Relief From Forfeiture, Admission of Fresh Evidence (ladd V Marshall)
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Civil Procedure Property Law Appeal Repossession Arrears of Rent Early Termination Agreement +6 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 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PERVEZ AKHTER

Applicant

Jacky chau King yin

1st Respondent

anthony tsang ho lun

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant Possession and Arrears / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Early Termination Agreement (ETA) created primary conditions entitling Respondents to offset deposit and avoid rent liability
  2. 2 Whether Conditions 3 and 5 of the ETA were breached by the Respondents
  3. 3 Whether acceptance of $35,000 and keys amounted to waiver by conduct or acceptance of performance

Ratio Decidendi

Conditions 3 and 5 of the Early Termination Agreement were not 'secondary' and imposed specific obligations including permission to remove items; Respondents failed to prove permission (breach of Condition 5) and provided insufficient evidence that fixtures/equipment were left and in working order (insufficient to satisfy Condition 3); acceptance of $35,000 and keys did not constitute waiver by conduct because the sum was part-payment of arrears and acceptance pre-dated the breach consequences; CCTV material did not meet Ladd v Marshall criteria and would not likely change the result; no arguable error of law was identified and consequently leave to appeal and stay were dismissed and...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal dismissed; application for stay of execution dismissed; costs of interlocutory application awarded to Applicant

Orders

  • Leave to appeal dismissed
  • Application for stay of execution dismissed