Licensor who refused to leave

In ADCO Enterprises Ltd v Pets Central (HK) Ltd ([2011] HKEC 1129) ADCO had granted ADP (a seller of pet-related products and services) a lease of some shop premises. The lease was for four years from 25th September 2009 with an option to renew (exercisable by giving written notice)  for a further four years. ADP agreed to share the property with Pets Central. In the licence agreement, ADP agreed that it would renew the lease if Pets Central gave ADP 15 days prior written notice. There was a dispute as to whether or not Pets Central had given and ADP had received the notice. In any event, ADP did not seek to renew the lease. Pets Central refused to vacate the property at the end of the lease. This meant that the new tenant was unable to move in as agreed and ADCO had to compensate them. ADCO eventually recovered possession from Pets Central after successful recovery proceedings. It now sought (by way of summary judgment) damages because of the compensation that it had had to pay to the new tenant. The court agreed that the matter was simple and gave judgment against Pets Central (with a stay of execution pending the hearing of a counterclaim).

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: