Land Law Lecture Slides PDF

LandL4leaseiii Tue, Feb 11, 2025 10:50AM 1:47:49 **SUMMARY KEYWORDS** Chinese New Year, tutorial schedule, lease agreement, privity of contract, covenants, assignment of lease, sublease, right of reversion, enforceable covenants, doctrine of waste, landlord obligations, tenant obligations, reme...

LandL4leaseiii Tue, Feb 11, 2025 10:50AM 1:47:49 **SUMMARY KEYWORDS** Chinese New Year, tutorial schedule, lease agreement, privity of contract, covenants, assignment of lease, sublease, right of reversion, enforceable covenants, doctrine of waste, landlord obligations, tenant obligations, remedies for breach, forfeiture of lease, relief against forfeiture **SPEAKERS** Speaker 1, Speaker 2 Oh, great A lot of All right, let\'s get started New Year. I hope everyone had a restful Chinese New Year and actually had an also additional recall from lecture and tutorials. Today, we do have a tutorial, just a reminder. And then next week, we have a tutorial to finish off thesis. So there is, this is the only week that\'s back to back. It\'s just because of the holiday that we have to kind of move the tutorial to this weekend and next week. So this tutorial this weekend, there\'s also a tutorial next week. So last time before we break for Lunar, lunar holiday, we didn\'t finish the slides for the for the leases to and as I said before, that\'s part of one of the more complicated lectures in this in this course, I believe half of you weren\'t there so, but that doesn\'t mean that I\'m not going to rehash it again, so that we all are on the same page. So I will go through last time\'s lecture by way of just going through this diagram. I think that\'s part of the best way to kind of explain everything. Now let\'s just begin. I So note this diagram. Who else? This represents the landlords. T represents the tenants. St is a sub tenant. If landlord one that\'s is considered to be the original landlord and tenant one is also considered to be original. That means that they entered into an agreement for a lease. So because they have entered into a few activities. They have a relationship, a contractual relationship. So that\'s why there\'s a previous contract. Okay? So because l1 being the original landlord and tenant one original tenant enters into a agreement for landlord one to grant a lease. So anytime that we are having a landlord granting a lease or granting some interest, we go down that way. So the best way to think of it, anytime that we go downwards, it\'s called a grant. And you think that goes that way, we\'ll call it just to let\'s not even think of the theory. Just think of the diagram to make it simple. So l1 grants at least to t1 because l1 grants t1 release, there\'s a creation of a legal state. That means that there is something called a prividio state, priview state. Now why do we care about all this? Is because, at the end of the day, what we want to do is that the whole purpose of developing this relationship, or discuss about these relationships, is when one wants to sue the other, because you can only sue if there is a privy office. State or primitive of contract, because in obviously contract law, you note that in order for you to actually enforce the obligations or benefits of a contract, they must be party good on contract, unless there are obviously situations where third parties have benefits. But for our purposes, all you need to know is that they must be part one of the parties, and that\'s why we are previewing the contract previous state similar. One must have some sort of interest in that particular state to have a right to sue on that state. Now obviously this gets more and more complicated, but this is basically how it works. So if t1 and l1 and t1, covenants, or interest in that lease. In that least, are certain provisions known as covenants. So we remember what covenants are, right? So covenants are basically the terms in that lease. But because a lease is usually, by the way, of a deed, we call it covenants. Covenants. So take, for example, this lecture, when we go into at least three we\'ll be talking all about covenants. What are different covenants in a lease? So basically equivalent to what you constitute terms in a contract. So take, for example, if t1 covenants to pay l1 for monthly rent. That is a covenant, therefore l1 enforcement against t1 if t1 doesn\'t pay right substantially because of the fact that is private contract. In addition, if there\'s a previous now, there are issues when we have the first original tenant, or the first original that or decides to get rid of their interest in that property by way of an assignment? Do? Okay, if you, if you know nothing about the theory down is, grant that way is assignment, okay, basically, assignment is, is disposal of the interest. Okay, so take, for example, t1 decides that they\'re not going to be able to use that lease anymore. Say t1 decides that they\'re going to go to South Africa to work and decide to assign the lease to someone else, assigning leases as good as giving it up to someone else. So giving it to say t2 now here we know that there is a privity of contract. Now, for those who gets confused already, the best way to think of this, anytime there\'s a line between one another, that is for people contract. Are we okay with that? Just Just think of it visually, because t1 and t2 enters into the contract, right? Or t1 to basically sensitive t2 in other to sell it or to do some sort of disposing. Okay? Now, but as t1 gives it to t2 assigns it to t2 suppose it to d2 what ends up happening is that it also assigns D a state over the legal state over, right? So basically the original, least that was between here and here, gets assigned to T, t2 so therefore there is no previous state between these two, right? Because the state is gone once the sign is gone. Are we okay with that? Right? Makes sense, because you\'ve signed it away. But what you do have is between l1, and L and t2 there is a relationship. Is that they share the same as state. So here we have a previous state. Okay? Are we okay? Because all you technically doing is that t2 is stepping into the shoes of t1 so basically, when that time it happens, this one looks like basically, are we okay with that? Right? We\'re okay with that. That\'s where we have that pretty stain coming in. Similarly, if we go one over to t3 Simon, here, we also have the trivia, but t2 no longer have the state once that happens. I. Now take say, what happens when t3 decides that, oh, I\'m not gonna assign away or dispose of my interests, entire interest in that of that lease, but I decide to create a sub lease, a sub lease. So the difference between this and this, this and this, is that this one is given their entire lease away that they signed together. So therefore, basically it\'s, I\'m stepping into the shoes. But where as here, t3 decides that they\'re going to make a lease, separate lease, what they\'re technically doing is that they\'re carving an interest from the original interest. That\'s from here degree between a one t1 two into a separate, smaller legal state, a Real cable. What that essentially means is that the interest between l1 t1 has now been further cut into a separate interest that\'s given partially to st where t3 retains a bit of that other interest. Are we okay with that? That\'s why, when that happens, when you do that carving up exercise, you have a new estate, which that means t3 st will have a previous state of that new carved out interest. Are we okay with that? That\'s why the sub tenant here, and l1 here will have no privity of a state because it\'s a different type of estates. Are we okay with that? Okay? Now let\'s make it even more harder. Within the lease itself, there are specific provisions known as covenants, right, similar to what contract covenants? Why we call it covenants is because it\'s usually by deed. Now take, for example, there is a covenant, so a term, if you like to think of it, what we call a covenant between l1, and t1, or t1 not to build a wall. That\'s the Covenant Not to build a wall. Now, what happens if t1 then assigns a lease to t2 in which you\'re in the assignment, there is no expressed there is no Express covenant or any provisions that says to acknowledge the covenant between l1 and t1 for not building a wall. So there is no Express covenant in this assignment to say that, Oh, by the way, t2 you should not build a wall. There\'s nothing less work. The question now is, can l1 enforce that covenant against t2 because t2 is no longer sorry, well, t1 Well, l1 can only sue t2 in Preview state. But because with our covenants, we have to look at whether the covenant itself is enforceable. Okay, so we have to figure out him, l1, then sue t2, for him, if he builds this wall. And the answer to that is that you need to determine whether the covenant itself is enforceable. Because if it\'s not enforceable, although there is a previous state, it doesn\'t mean that you can enforce the covenant. You still can sue, but the problem is, is that the covenant is still not enforceable. Okay, so there\'s two things to think about here. Previous state just means you can sue, but doesn\'t mean that all the covenants within that lease is enforceable between the original landlord, original owner and the original talent. Are we okay with that now between t1 t2 and t1 and t2 obviously there is going to be a preview of contract, but no expressed. I\'m just saying not to not build a wall, but in order for you to determine whether you could enforce it, is that there is a test. Now this test becomes quite difficult because there is actually three tests, and we\'ve only talked about one last time, if it touches and concerns of that, does covenant, then technically it can be enforceable against its successor, because it\'s related to that. So some would say that this is called the Spencer\'s case. So that common law, if it touches and concerns of that, you can technically say that l1 can enforce it against t2 however, because there are situations which comes becomes convoluted, and also because Hong Kong has something called multi story buildings, it becomes way too complicated. So the Legislative Council decided that they\'re going to put this on a statutory footing, so section 41 Okay, so let me Write this down. So enforce here. We could do much. That\'s the first way of forcing covenants on the law is known as a Spencer\'s case. Now, there are restrictions to that. We\'ll talk about that little bit later on. So for example, it doesn\'t enforce positive COVID Common Law is a good example. The Okay, so this example very strict. Now, the other way that you can enforce the covenant is by section 41 three of the convince and happy word in this this particular section is created specifically for DMCs. However, it does work for these four covenants, as long as you satisfy section 41, two, these two methods, these two methods are only for legal leases. Are we okay with that? The only work for legal leases, anything in Section 41 will only work with legal leases. So if the lease between l1, and t1 is a legal lease, but then t1, to t2 for some reason, becomes an equitable lease. For some reasons of formalities, as you know, then the issue becomes whether it be enforced or not, and you cannot enforce the covenant of the dispensers. Case, which is the common law rule, which touches in these various land or by section 41 now, obviously we\'re gonna talk about all these tests in great detail once we talk about in leases in your tutorial next week. But I just need to have appreciation what the overview looks like in how we enforce. Because if you can\'t figure out who to sue, if you can sue or not, or if it\'s enforceable or not, then we you\'re pretty much done for the game. Positive covenants cannot enforce, as an example of some of the one of the restrictions that the Spencer\'s case come along with all this is going to be legal uses. Okay? So if you see. The equitable is you cannot, you cannot enforce the covenant under these regime. It\'s one possible regime that you can enforce it under, and that\'s in equity, in tufts and faux. Day. That\'s a rule in Texas. Again, we\'ll talk about the specific rules of the later on during tutorial. So obviously touch is concerned of the original plan, etc, etc. There are criterias of that, but this is the only way that you can enforce any equitable ease. Are we okay? So that\'s going t1, t2, now where we left off is basically what I\'m going to explain to you. Now, instead of going through all the slides, I\'ll just tell you just the overview, and then you can read the slides. Basically, it\'s the statute. Anyways. Now we\'ve only covered the T, 1t, 2t, threes and St. So far right. We haven\'t looked at on top yet, l1 l2 and l3 now, l1 can assign its right to l2 and l2 similarly, sometimes you\'ll see in a textbook as a but I just like to use L, which is because it just shows subsequent now, when they assign something l1 assigned in l2 They\'re technically assigning a right, a right of reversion. So why is it called the right of reversion? Well, because technically, l1 doesn\'t have the right anymore yet. Right, it only has a right to take back it from t1 after lease is done. That\'s why the right will revert back to l1 after the lease is complete. Are we okay with that? So l1 and t1 has a lease. A lease has a certain duration. During that duration, that right is going to be the tenants right. The Lord can interfere with that. But how does l1 then deal with his right to sell the property. Well, it\'s technically selling the right of reversion, the right for t1 at the end of the lease to give back the right equilibrium state, back to l1 that\'s what all means when it\'s when you hear the right reversion. Are we okay with that? That way still right of reversion, of reversion to make it more confusing, if it\'s not already is, is that between l1 and l2 there is a statutory regime that basically says that anytime you assign your right of reversion, all the rights will go to the person that you have assigned the rate of reversion to, right? So in terms of that, it will be section 31 and section 30 212, this talks about the burden and benefit, we\'ll come back to that. Okay, we\'ll come back to that. But what it\'s all it\'s saying with those two section is everything of terms of the rights of the Covenant goes to l2 from l1 to l2 just as obviously, are we okay with that? Now there is a interesting difficulty. Here say l1 goes to l2 right? It\'s signs of driver version, and it says section 31 one and section 32 one basically says everything goes with it. Okay? Unless I. Unless it\'s explicitly stated in assignment reversion that certain rights are retained. Okay? If you assign the right reversion, you\'re signing everything that is the that is a general position, unless you say, I\'ve reserved a particular right. Okay. That means l2, can sue T 1e, respective of privity of a state because of Section 31 one and 30 211, can argue that, if that and and listen to me, as I said, that you\'re part of confused already said, Well, isn\'t there? There\'s a previous state already, because they\'re a part of the state, yes, if it\'s a legalistic if it\'s a legal base, okay, do okay, if this was a legal lease, no problem. L2 can obviously Sue t1 because it steps in the shoes of l1 but if l1 and t1 this is a equitable lease. If it\'s an equitable lease, technically, what Spencer\'s case has stated in other case law said that there is no media state in those situations. So that\'s why you can\'t that\'s why equitable pieces cannot be. Doesn\'t work between t1 and t2 similarly for up there. However, if there\'s an equitable use between t1 and l1 and t1 l2 will be able to sue t1 Okay, so it doesn\'t matter if this is a legal lease or equitable lease section 31 one and 32 one basically allows for that. Okay, you will. As you start reading the tests and also a textbook, they make reference to something called benefit and burden. When we talk about benefit and burden, we\'re talking about covenants, a covenant toward a person who agrees to covenant. So, for example, I agree not to build a wall. COVID t is the person who is basically the other side. So to come in, Tor, in this situation myself, will have a bird. I will not have the right to build the wall. Come in. T will they have the benefit of that right? The wall will not be built. So that\'s how we look at burden and benefit. There\'s always going to be two sides of the coin when we\'re talking about covenants, and extremely important when we\'re talking about the specific tests. So we\'ll be so once we deal with mortgages, we\'ll talk about enforceability of covenants. This is when we go through each and every one of those tests. Okay, basically, you need to know what is a benefit, and you didn\'t know what is the burden. Because if you don\'t, then you won\'t be able to figure out whether it\'s whether you can that particular covenant is enforceable for our purposes, for today and next time is that all you need to know is that if l1 and t1 there is a legal lease, always fine. If l1 and t1 has an equitable lease, l2 still can enforce, still can enforce against t1 by section 31 and 32 what, Although it has an echo police, are We? Okay? Okay? Should be so this kind of leads us to the discussion of Section 31 and 32 now, one of the things that I think is important to understand with all these sections, even though section 41 is that it uses very. Is terms having worked as a subject matter, rates the land. All of this basically means the exact same thing touches and concerns the land, because there\'s certain requirements that you have to have in order for you to meet the requirements of each section. And you\'ll figure that out once we go into the possibility of covenants in a few weeks time. But what I want you to understand right now is that if it doesn\'t touch and concern a land, it means it doesn\'t relate to the land. If it doesn\'t relate to the land, it means it\'s not going to be forcible, regardless of anything. Okay, so that\'s a general concept of this idea of which concern I told you what the operation of Section 31 one is. It\'s basically signing all the benefit in 32 is basically all the burden to the subsequent landlord or assign me of the right of a burden that\'s probably need to know at this current report. Point. Okay, okay, now this is a slide that I want you guys to really, really focus on this, and also the next two is this p and a swift investment. Anytime you need to determine whether the covenant touches and concerns the land, you will quote me this case, because this case is the case that established the rule or test for touching and concerning the land. Okay? So again, doesn\'t touch and concern the land. You don\'t have an enforceable covenant, full stop, okay? You must have that, because it\'s basically saying it\'s a land covenant, or else. What else can it be? If you guys remember last time? Oh, so personal covenant. Personal covenants are not enforceable, okay, personal covenants are not enforceable. If you guys remember from last, okay, I\'m just gonna quickly, just talk about the facts in this case. Very self explanatory, l1, and T. Basically, as enter into lease, there is a covenant of surety, which basically means that if T doesn\'t pay a third party, G will pay the guarantor or a surety. So it\'s the G being the guarantor. Okay, in in the instance that T will not pay, T cannot pay. The question is, can l1 which signed the right of reversion to l2 enforce it against G? And the answer is yes you can. This is what you need to know. So basically, last time to talk about it being quasi tenant, but you can read it all by yourself, here is the actual test that you need to know. So covenant, which touches and concerns the land, is one. The Covenant benefits only the reversionary of the time being, and it\'s separated from the reversion ceases to be of benefit to the COVID. 19. Two, the covenant affects the nature, quality, mode of user or value of the land of reversioner. Three, the covenant is not expressed to be personal. Four, the fact that COVID has to pay a sum of money will not prevent it from touching concerning land. So long as the three foregoing conditions are satisfied and COVID relates to something to be done to on to boarding relations to land. Okay, you must quote me this test during an exam, right? Okay, this is basically if it relates to land, and each one of the tests that we\'ll talk about the liberal will have this, because anytime you hear touches concerns of land, at least a subject matter in relations to land, everything in those sections in the CPO, which phrases differently means the Same thing, which is touches and concerns the land. Now you should note, in the UK, they\'ve gotten rid of this already. However, in Hong Kong, just to make everyone\'s lives horrible, they decided to keep touching concerning the land. And therefore we still have to go through this process of determining whether the covenants bind. So the whole point of identifying, again, of touching concerning land, is whether the covenant will bind subsequent, subsequent successors entitled substances, entitlement, because, again, the. Always the difficulty is to enforce it against people who are not the original COVID 19 poor contract. So question to you is, do you think there should be a, b? This we talked about subleases, so we\'re not gonna talk about that again. Okay, I\'m just gonna you guys can read the section 41 but what I think most important thing I want you to understand for now is that section 41 does arise when we\'re talking about enforcing these old covenants, right? When we\'re talking about stuff with the DMC, which is slightly different, we\'re talking about restrictive covenants with different co owners, so, which is slightly different. Okay, the slightly different. So, but it still operates the same way. So as long as you kind of meet the criterias for it, then you\'d be fine. So the criterias could be set under Section 41 two of the CPO, which basically states that this Section applies to an express covenant and the COVID implied by other disorders of any other law. Section applies to the government where they\'re positive or restrictive, if A, B and C are actually satisfied. Okay, if a b and c, so section 41 two, a b, a b and c is satisfied. Then, according to Section 41 three, is that it binds successors in life. Okay? Section 41, five is important. You\'ll find that when you are engaged with questions, you\'ll find that a positive comment shall not be virtue of only of this section before spoke against a at least C, from the COVID tour and from a successor in title, or from any person driving title under through covenant Tor or B, any prescribing title under through section at least C, and any person merely because he is an occupier flag. So two things to note, positive COVID does not bind person who is a lease seat and also a occupied land, right? So there is a, there is some caveats to that. I Okay, this is important. Let\'s just go through the slide. When review of contract was considered earlier, the focus so far, region parties were concerned was that the burden rather than the benefit. So we\'ve been talking about all the issues relating to the burden, right? So tenant not being to do this, not being to do that, let\'s do this. So far as the benefits are concerned, there\'s a marked distinction between landlords and tenants. So obviously, as I said previously, that any confidence they will attract to two different things, right? One could give benefit. One is going to be burden. It\'s important to first note that we\'re not concerned with purely personal covenants that do not touch a concern left. If it is a personal covenant, we do not find the successors in time. Okay? So take, for example, it\'s a covenant to every time, every time, every time I change a new product for my company, you must change the name of the building. That\'s a personal covenant, although changing the name may possibly be a issue with a line of covenant right, but it\'s wholly personal in respect to it is a personal right for the company, either rights nor burdens of such kind of pass on assignment, except the specific rights may specifically sign the same way of contractual can be assigned. So you have to understand that previously, that no rights are actually going to be assigned unless, unless you expressly stated right now that has been kind of fixed by section 31 and 32 of the CPO, but in normal circumstances, or in back in the day, it wasn\'t that way. Now, if you want certain things not to pass, then you have to express this data. So for example, I have a right to sue or previous breaches. That is an example of a right that you must must actually express this. The assignment, nor are we concerned with breaches occurred post assignment. Logic. Is such breach cause of sign or no loss? If that makes sense, right? Once it\'s signed, they breached it. Why should the assign me be actually going to be going to be actually caught under this right. This makes sense. I\'ve assigned the right. They breached it. Nothing do with me, right? And again, we also note that section 41 eight of the CPO also states that you alleviate your liability once you have no interest in that particular piece of land. Again, this is only applicable for legalese. Section 41 is only applicable for legalese. Okay, so don\'t tell me if there\'s echo, release that. Section 41 eight alleviates you from the liability. Are we okay with that? Okay, let\'s quickly talk about re K, okay, and then we go on to break and then I can finish it the slides pretty quickly for the covenants part. So we haven\'t we have a case called RE K, which basically have covenants between the original landlord and the tenant and t1 now between the l1 and t1 original landlord and t1 there are these covenants to keep harvested. There should the premises against loss or damage to fire, see to lay all monies received under any such policy, but sure as blah, blah, blah and so on. So those three are actually part of the covenants between l1, and t1, in 1908, the tenant assigned it at least to King. Okay, so King is t2 King is t2 and in 1944 the factory was severely damaged by fire, but but could not be repaired because of the wartime restrictions. King died in 1949 in 1951 the freehold version served notice on King\'s executor alleging breach of the sea covenants in the lease. Is there any proceedings to recover possession of the property in default of those we just being remedied in 1954 that county council also required all interest in the property. During the negotiation for the transfer release from King\'s executor to the London County Council, the executors sought to determine if they would still be liable to the free home conversion, as if so they would want to covenant indemnity against them. If that\'s just facts for you to read later on. Let me explain them to you here. Okay, l1, and t1 went to the lease, right? L1, and t1 has basically all these governments now. L1 decides that they\'re going to sell a property, sell parts of the property, or all the property, to London County Council. So London, London County Council is. L2, okay. L2 sorry for the non conformity to the previous diagrams, but London County Council is l2 now the question here is that, can l1 subsequently Sue King, the king\'s estate? Do for this breach of covenant, because, obviously they didn\'t. We fix the the property. And the answer is, No, it can\'t. L1 cannot sue kings estate because, in accordance, according to 31 one of the CPO, what we know is that all the interest has now gone. I just to ensure that we are on a safe page, I\'m going to draw the diagram, l1, this is L, T, 2t, or t1, t1, I then East it okay. So this is the Kings estate, right? This kings estate. Now we have London Council, which is basically l2 so. They sold everything to l2 all the intros. The question here, so this is a assignment of reversion. The question here is, can l1 still sue t2 and the answer is no, because, by virtue of Section 31 all the interest has now gone to l2 therefore l1 cannot sue t2 only person that can sue t2 is l2 which is the London County Council. The reason why they asked this is because they were talking to Kings of state, because obviously they\'re, they\'re in tendency, right? The question is that, should we have a covenant to identify them? If, if that happens. So that is basically the crux of that. So again, this is basically what I\'ve said only difference is that they respected this past breach. They can\'t, because obviously the operation of Section 31 right? Although there was a past breach, technically can\'t sue because of the fact that you were giving it up to someone else. Okay, elegant profit limited in chan lie saying same thing. Not going to go over this, because I think you can read this, and also it\'s also part of the cases that you\'ll be doing this week. So I think going to be fairly okay with not going through this now section the last of these slides, basically, is very simple. An attempt has been tried, to use section 32, one to try to go over this. The answer is, it doesn\'t work. Okay? And what I\'ve been want to try to do was basically compare the difference in warnings between them. But essentially, there\'s nothing important for you to go aside from that we have the benefits. And the burden, which is split up to these two. Okay, take a 10 minute break. This is a summary left already hearing this 10 minutes, and then we\'ll go into the next one I feel like. So, Chan, Dear, Chan, Chan, yeah, My Chan. Okay, suggestion, what\'s Cook my soil. Cook my soil. So Yes, Sorry. Chan, spots, Okay, Welcome back to India. A month we Have some Gage. We It\'s news, yeah, Yeah, p, q1, element. P, Q, also mayo. Oh, Bucha, we child. Here so My Gosh, Okay, oh, Chan, oh, Order, oh, may not Hello, hello, Hello, That\'s good, ma\'am. All right, let\'s Get our discussion with Lisa\'s i You should be happy. This is the last leases that we\'ll be talking about. It does get worse from here, if it hasn\'t. So just a reminder, this week we have leases one and two tutorials. Next week is thesis, three, so just remember it for your presentations. Lisa\'s one and two this week, and this is three for All right, so a little bit, I guess, less heavy. Lisa three mostly talks about our lovely covenants. So the specifics covenants that are found in leases. So today we\'ll go over an introduction to covenants, landlord, tenant covenants, landscape covenants, usual covenants and remedies of tents and landlord for a breach of covenants. So everything you need to know about COVID, very quickly, as you already know when we are talking about business we are talking about, obviously, there are exceptions. We are having it. Up in a deep form. And I\'m sure every one of you knows that section four is the requirement, so two is obviously following all the sections, so one of which is under three years. So COVID are important. And why are they important is because of the fact that they are found in a deed. They are promises that are made unrest. That means that it is a solid promise. Now again, the difference between a contract and a deed is that a deed does not have consideration, and therefore that\'s why we have things such as a deed of gift, right? So if you give someone something, then you should have it as a deed of gift to show that there is a interest that\'s being given to someone. Okay? So that\'s basically, I think, for the most part, for this slides, it can be expressed for implied covenants, depending on on the actual deed itself. So for example, when we talk about land, we do have both expressed and also implied, without exception, that\'s usually the case with contraction terms. Matters are governed by Express covenants. There\'s no room for implied covenants covering the same ground or any part of it. So basically, any time that you have a Express covenant, then you cannot have an existing implied covenant that contradicts, because Express covenant is the one that you open right? Because, obviously that is express intentions and parties. And there is one exception, which is the doctrine waste, which we\'ll be talking about local Iran, which basically is any act that alters the nature of the land, whether for better, moving the proper value or worse, your tenant damages and devours property. Now, doctrine of waste is something would say that, Oh, it\'s, it\'s kind of like a covenant. It\'s not. It\'s basically it exists as a doctrine that, irrespective of what, what the covenant says, this doctrine of waste is is going to be suddenly applied into any of these contracts. So note, just as Dr waste applies this whole tenants, landlords law supplies, the freehold estates like tenants and versioners. So basically, this just basically means that it applies to everybody, irrespective of whether it\'s a piece or it\'s a complete assignment to someone else. Hong Kong holds COVID to the private landlord and implied, rather than expressed. The government previously does not enter into any Express covenants and government lease. This practice dates for the days of the Hong Kong as a British calling so express COVID, 19 part of landlord are also rarely found. Short term private leases commonly encountered in residential tendencies. So the ones that you are expected to know are the ones I\'ll be telling you in these slides. By inspecting you can go off and learn all the different employed COVID that are possible two and most, most important implied COVID on the part of landlord or obligation of quiet enjoyment and non derogation from ground. Now these are, in my opinion, as part of the most important two. So basically, a landlord, once they give you an interest to land as a lease, they should, one, leave you alone, as in you should have quite enjoyment of land, and for not the landlord has renewed. And two, is the non decoration on ground, meaning that it cannot be contradictory to what the Grant says. Simply, if they granted you to have a a chemical plant and then that that\'s supposed to kind of emit certain fumes, they can\'t come back to you say, No, you can\'t do that, because that will be a derivation from the grant. So usually what happens is that the derogation, non derogation from the grant, is basically wider than this quiet enjoyment idea. So basically you cannot take away what you\'ve given the right of tenant, I would tend to quite first, not to the absence of the noise per se, but the right to be free from actual landlord that might interfere with tenants use of the premise. So it\'s not just just a landlord outside making a big, huge fuss or big, huge noise, as long as they infringe in your enjoyment of the land that\'s sufficient to prove that there is a breach of this implied covenant of quiet village. Pregnant while access noise on the part of the landlord, maintain a breach of the tenants right by enjoyment. Most cases you\'ll see next week, we do the problem. You might encounter other other things that landlord may do that will annoy samples of breaching covered by landlord. Renovation works carried out by the landlord based on the window and wall, floor, ceiling, tempered glass without ventilation, opening up, supplying foul air from a centralized air group system and changing the nature of the buildings. Landlord is responsible for any interference caused by someone deriving title from him, provided ax or law firm or someone actually authorized by so any agents that goes and passengers near the tenants that would also be flexible for the breach of Covenant. Now, if the landlord, for some reason, decides to assign parts of his rights to someone else, and they start disrupting the tenant, that is a possible reach of COVID, however, landlords that respond unrelated parties secure superior. Your annoyance or inconvenience is not a breach of tenants right, occupy, enjoyment the direction of an internal staircase outside tenants window was held not to be actionable interference, frown and flower. So you have to differentiate between what is actually simply inconvenience or just simply annoying, rather than actually a breach. Again, here norm to half months the movement works being carried out to the building. So in contrary, so the other, in my COVID, rather, to the right of my enjoyment, is the not to derivate from a grant. So basically, what it is is the grand tour should not have in something of one hand, use his or her other hand to take away the means of enjoying that thing. So, as I said before, if you grant the tenant in particular, right, you can suddenly say, Oh, by the way, I granted you, but I\'m going to take it away now, because that would be considered to be a breach of the non derogation grant. Note that the principle of non derogation from Grant is not to hear dependencies the obligation not to deny for the grant is closely related to tense right by the joint or arguably wider. So in situations that you will have during the exam, for example, is that you\'ll find that they are quite similar. So see which one you will use, basically. So when in doubt, I would think, look at whether they have promised something. The landlord promised something at the beginning, and then suddenly they take it away. So for example, they they\'ve rented this particular commercial flat, sort of commercial space for a particular purpose, you may be ventured into an agreement to have certain types of ventilations, for example. That may be indicative of that the landlord agreeing for that particular space to use for that particular purpose. Therefore, if they don\'t allow for it, that means that it could be possibly a breach of the non decoration to from this brand. So for example, if you\'re building a kitchen where you pick a restaurant, also they sell out, by the way, can allow you to have a nice smell the fried chicken coming out of from the kitchen, which doesn\'t seem to be that. It seems to be very close to a non derogation threat, which is dim take action. Here we have a classic case element of Latimer and Clark, which involves premises the left use as a timber yard, done is erected a building on a side, adjacent to the rented premises, which restricted flow of air by the drying shed of the tent. This was held to be a dairy creation from his ground people, because obviously, if, if you a restricted flow of air. These issues there. Charter trust and Davies, the landlord of a mall, permitted a tenant to operate his business in such a way as a. Amount to a nuisance. This was had held to be a deregration grant. However, in order to amount to deregulation from a grant, act must actually interfere with the contemplated use, not merely render it less desirable. I think we should highlight that, because I think it\'s important to act must actually interfere with a contemplated use not merely rendered undesirable or less desirable. So I would consider that as a part of the tests, I guess, in terms of whether there is a derivation from the ground that\'s the building of a public lavatory by the government on adjoining land, which had the fact of reducing the size of any building could be rented on site was held not to amount to a derivation. So obviously, when you are answering these types of questions whether there is a breach, you also need to kind of consider the various different cases because it\'s very fact specific. So when you are given the facts, you must engage with the facts and discuss, how do Are they similar to some of these cases, how they are not in respect to whether a covenant has an illusion, but obviously, for this particular one, you should be focusing on the acts which actually interfere, actually interfere with their activities. The old common law rule that there was no implied covenant as to the statute of fitness, of repair of premises and these remains in Hong Kong. Well, okay, caveat, Emporium, if you guys remember, so buyers beware. So when you are obviously, if you arrive at a particular building and you haven\'t looked at it, you purchase a particular flat, you haven\'t went in to look at it, then it is your fault. You cannot blame the seller landlord to say that, Oh, by the way, it\'s it\'s not what you expected, because obviously that\'s not sufficient. Now, obviously there are other implied covenants that must be for example, if you are leasing particular flat, it must be habitable. So if it\'s inhabitable, then obviously there is an issue. So that is a different type of covenant. But obviously, if it\'s not entirely what you expect, don\'t expect that that is going to be a covenant inquired into the lease itself. The only section is where premises are like, left firm furnish there\'s an implied covenant that they obviously fit for human capitation and start off in the term of the term may, however, be possible to apply based on business efficiency and implied covenant on the part of landlords called property and reasonable repair. Obviously, that is a point that you need to argue. Obviously, again, the position is that institution doesn\'t happen where landlord has expressly undertaken on a duty to repair, his liability will not arise until has notice of need of for repair. So basically, what you can do is that you can put an express covenant in your lease to say that, Oh, the landlord will repair X, Y and Z. So so again, for those who are renting property, that\'s something quite important, because I recently came, came across a case where there was issues with the air conditioner from a client. Basically, the denial refused to fix the air conditioner. And I said, Well, it\'s not technically found in the lease, so it\'s very difficult to comply, to compel them to to fix it, because it\'s usually needs to be expressed notice the to emanate from the tenant. So obviously the tenant will need to tell the landlord that there is repairs if it\'s first stated, the state of law has been argued to be unsatisfactory. Okay, so this is a point of argument that you guys need to kind of think about, like, why should land be any different than any other things that we\'re dealing with? So take, for example, for those who have taken sales of commercial law, you should have come across something known as sales of goods, right? So sales goods ordinance, there are implied terms. So Section 15, 1617, are the implied terms that would imply certain types of things into the contracts. So one of which is Section 16, talks about the quality, also fit for purpose, and also the fitness of the particular item. Now the question is, why should land not have that? It seems to be a very good essay question to actually talk about this and make that compare. Person, but something to kind of understand in terms of covenants that in land law, given the fact that it\'s it\'s so generous, unique, expensive, one of its kind, yet we don\'t have these types of provisions. Okay, so that\'s something to think about, although being a red is not essential requirement for lease is commonly presented to both leases in the absence of other consideration. Example, redefine unless expressing excluded, it is an implied term that attends, shall pay a reasonable sum for use and occupation of premise. Okay. So again, you know, obviously there is, there isn\'t a requirement, if you remember from last time, in terms of the criteria for at least, to pay rent. However, there is a covenant to say that. Well, there isn\'t something that\'s stated regarding rent you should pay a reasonable amount. But obviously that\'s something, again, where rent is reserved, but no time for payment is stipulated. It\'s implied that the rent is payable in arrears. So it is thus common to find leases and explicit provision as a time of payment for rent, usually expense. So again, it is when we were talking about leases, we are talking just a rule of law that one must have certain covenants. There are other implied covenants, which, which, which have been already established or it\'s expressed. Okay? So basically, in terms of time of payment, you should express when you should have it. I Right. So submitting that even death of a tenant is parallel tenancy did not bring the tenants to end. Although a right of re entry usually has to express reserve the landlord and tenant consulted ordinance implies a right of re entry for breach of an obligation of pay rent for certain domestic tendencies and business tendencies. So obviously, if you reach a covenant, for example, in the case of not paying rent, and usually that\'s what it is, then the landlord can actually enter the property and take the property themselves. So this is a self help type of mechanism which they can do that. Now one needs to be very careful. So although the tenant owes money to the landlord, you just can\'t go in guns blazing, because of one of the things is that it has to be proportional. So if you start thinking bulldozer into the into the front door, that may be a problem, right? Obviously, you need to use proportional force, or it becomes, or become assault. Then, then we have a different course that you\'d be doing, the criminal part of it with the land, because the tenant is regarded as present owner premises, and it says, provided statute that there\'s only to pay all rents and taxes. So usually this particular covenant, usually the landlord doesn\'t for in practical terms. So usually they pay the government rent, for example, or the management fees. But sometimes it may be specified in the actual agreement who needs to pay in short term tenancies. Property tax is usually expressed to be payable by the landlord. We now revisit this idea of the doctrinal waste that we talked about previously. So again, this is an exception for Applied covenants, because one doesn\'t argue that it is covenant, but it is just a overall doctorate that\'s always been applied so doctrine waste trying to develop to ensure balance is maintained in the interest of the free whole life tenant and the perversion waste is any alteration of state of the land, and they come in for things or for kinds realm, ever bidding waste, voluntary waste, equitable waste and permissive waste. You need to read this very carefully, because what it says is not what it means. Okay, let me go for it. Let me emphasize that what it says is not what it means. So equitable waste doesn\'t mean. What it means is not equitable, okay? It actually means something bad. So in these circumstances, so all, all the tenants are liable for any of these four. Now this particular emerging ways is any positive act that alters the property in such a way to improve you\'re probably wondering whether you\'re talking about, I mean, brewing the property, and you\'re telling me that. Is a possible breach, and the answer is yes. So you\'re not supposed to do anything that property, unless you are given Express right to do so by the landlord. So even though you improve the value, it doesn\'t matter you\'re not supposed to do this. So some obvious things is some UB W\'s are unauthorized building works. So I\'m sure you\'ve heard on the news those decide to decide to have two flats broken down, to broken the wall down, and have one flat that may have increased the value, but that may not be permissible under this doctrine, the most effective remedy for space is, does not normally resolving financial loss is an injunction, either in mandatory or purgatory. Mandatory meaning that you have to do something. For example, take down the wall. Purgatory is you must not do something injunction, obviously, is that you can stop doing that during Chan and Luke one Tenet, who had roofed in a courtyard so as they incorporated to the lease premises will order reinstate premise because it changed the character of the building. However, because injunctive relief is discretionary, you may be refused. So not in all situations that you do this, that the court will allow for injunctive relief, although technically, if you do, there\'s various factors that the court will look into, but obviously, the way depends on the other facts of the particular case, Section 17 of the high coviddence is important because you again, obviously seek damages. So if what ends up happening is that you do find that by improving the value of the property that there is going to be some sort of some sort of damage on your part, then you can seek it through essentially 17 and normally injunctive relief is injunctive relief. You don\'t get both, right? We are it doesn\'t make sense, but you can under common law, but you can under Section 17, going to the next one voluntary ways, is the positive fact that detrimental alters the property. So detrimentally alters property so unless express the excluded. All tenants are liable for voluntary waste. So, for example, opening a working of a mine amounts to voluntary waste, but not working of an existing mind. Cutting of timber that is Oak ash and olive trees for at least which is at least 20 years old, is also voluntary waste, depending on dam. But note that the importance of local custom, beach and Bucha bridge and Cumberland, so you may consider that as voluntary waste there, but not in all circumstances. For example, for tree waste, Hong Kong, Hong Kong is full of investment tone in Bucha 19 three and sealed the entrances. Equitable waste consists of one acts of one pawn, deliberate and unquote destruction. Okay, so please be careful. It\'s not equitable. Okay? Equity doesn\'t spell on this is that if you are going to be destroying stuff that with no particular reason this is a breach of this and the leading case is main and Lord Bernard, which the life tenant, was granted a state this castle without impeachment of waste that actually expresses state that. But was found that even though they tried to irrigate from this waste, what ends up happening that court, transferring how that he cannot strip a castle of all its flat iron, glass doors and and boards within catcher brewing a property for some the remainder, man which he married against his wishes. Echo. Waste can thus be seen to be particularly fragrant form of foam, tree, base appears as possible to exclude liability for equit waste, but it\'s up to the tenant to demonstrate that he should be allowed to commit to equitable waste concern. Now again, remember, as I said, this is obviously agreement between two parties and. And it kind of is to the contrary for you to basically destroy the property and then say that you agree to do that right, but, but obviously you need to look at the context of the particular case. Last one, progressive waste consists of missions to do any acts that ought to be done in order to maintain the premise. So fixed term tenants are not periodic. Tenants are subject to progressive waste. So in most modern contexts, the role of progressive waste is much reduced. Most fixed term leases will contain Express columns of repair. In any event, what you should know is that a tenant has a right to to very simple tenant wear and tear, so scratches on the walls may be permissible. Okay, it doesn\'t have to be perfect. If you lived in there for 20 years, the courts not expecting to give a perfect flat back to the owner. But so appropriate where dairies also okay, but if you start destroying the waste, and that\'s a not the main quality waste, just just a just hearing product, periodic tendencies are subject to, imply COVID. Russell premises, wind like water tight, subject to fair weather and tear. So obviously, if, if there is a typhoon outside, if you decide to leave all the windows open, that may be bad, weekly, monthly. So all this stuff is, in my opinion, fairly straightforward respect to what we just heard to them about the hour we\'re at least contains a clause per an assignment, subletting and parting with possession, any contra standard subletting, parting possession is still valid. Okay, there are going to be certain tendencies that I will say explicitly that you\'re not allowed to sublease to any there are going to lease to you, and that\'s it. You\'re not supposed to be pleasing to anyone else. Normally, this is in domestic dwellings that they\'ll have this particular covenant. For example. Reason is that they want to deal with with you, and obviously they don\'t want to have issues of, obviously permeability of state, prevail of contract. And that\'s why it\'s they would explicitly put that, but having said that, if you do do that, it doesn\'t mean the assignment or sublease is invalidated. Okay, so the third party can still rely on that sub lease tenancy agreement that\'s with the head tenant, but what it means is that the landlord is then able to go after the tenant for a breach of lease. So again, it doesn\'t validate the lease that was created. Nevertheless, where the landlord has reserved right of re entry for breach of such covenant, he may be able to forfeit the lease which which will have the effect of terminating decided, for some reason. Now this is very important, because one of the one of the remedies for issues of sub tenants. So for example, if you you don\'t have a remedy of a state, what you can end up doing it just say, Look, I\'m going to forfeit the main lease. Because what happens is, remember, if remember the first diagram I showed you guys at the beginning of last, last lecture, is that we have different types of ownership, right? We have leases, sub leases, like so on and so forth. If we get rid of the top that all everything on the bottom, basically, is gone. So if you if the sub letter decides to do something that is a breach of covenant, and you realize that, Oh, crap, I cannot get them for a privity of a state, and I can\'t enforce a covenant. What you do is get rid of the main lease. Just get rid of the entire thing, and then that usually will bring the one who the tenant, which has previous states with the landlord to come to the table say, Look, I\'ll pay for it or whatever, right? But that\'s that\'s a possible way of dealing with issues of privity. Clauses restricting use are typically in street against the landlord. Again, it sounds like the CCO the control of conceptual passwords, but obviously not that sort of controversial referendum, as much as I think about rather now, according to COVID, prohibiting assignment will not cover something and vice versa, nor would a. COVID against sum or subway quote and broken by some possibly vice versa. Obligations of lab intents are usually treated as independent of each other, so obligations enter conditional or independent if the conditional then they either are concurrent or one precedes the other. So I\'ll give you examples of that. So if obligation x is independent of obligation y, then a breach of obligation x does not excuse the non performance of obligation y or vice versa. Now, if obligation X is concurrent with obligation of y, then non X excuses the non performance of y and vice versa. So if there\'s concurrent type of obligations that are constructed from from the tenant, if obligation X is conditional president of obligation y, then the nonprofit of obligation X will excuse nonprofits of obligation y\. So just just very general contrast. This is very important, very, very important, at least by sometimes on terms as subject to the usual covenants. So in exam, I am not going to say this is A, B, C, D, E, F, G, right? Covenants, I might say these are two covenants, including the usual covenants, which basically means these covenants, okay, so allow the tenants quite enjoyment, not to dedicate from rent from the landlord tenant to pay rent, to pay rent, rates and taxes to keep privacy repair landlord COVID is repaired to allow the reasonable access to view and repair the Para. So usually I would just say that, and then I said, Well, there\'s a breach in this. What happens? So what do I do? Right? So then you figure out if it\'s a breach of the usual covenants or not, right? Where are the least this grant is subject to the usual COVID Landlord also has implied rank of re entry for non payment of rent. So this is important. So if it\'s usual covering, then they can come in as part of the usual covers too. If you don\'t pay don\'t however, the list of usual cover is unposed and will adapt according to the practice of where the grant of a leases preceded by agreement to grant it\'s also applied, the agreement will be subject to the usual COVID. Thank you. Remedies. So remedies generally. So obviously, there are various things. So action for the agreed some so you should have rent damages, junctions and specific performance where landlord has reached impaired covenant, tend to take advantage of the ancient common law to treat any expenses incurred in effecting in repairs of someone\'s payment of rent. So that\'s something that I may that you may use, which is a real piece. However, in order do so, tenant must keep notice the landlord the need for repair, separate from edition tennis, write up, Echo, set off. Echo, set off is basically the only X amount, I believe this amount, therefore we subtract, okay. Case clear words are needed to exclude tenants. Remedy for eco right of set off. So I\'ll let you read about that too, too worried. It\'s also important to bear in mind, in addition to being able to sue his landlord for Bucha police or COVID tense as a the current owner of the land is also able to sue the landlord and tort for even trespassing nuisance. So in addition to preach of covenant, you can also have tort remedies depending on what the landlord does do. Although the landlord is generally liable for nuisance created by other tenants, he may be liable for if he has authorized So, for example, if they the landlord rented the place that they provided chemical waste, then if something happens that the landlord may be on hold for for that, addition to general remedies available to parties, the Most important remedy available landlord providing his preserved right himself is a right of the forfeit of the lease, basically giving it up, giving it up, meaning that there\'s the war right, therefore evidence of discharge, all government leases contain a right of re entry. Failure to pay rent for reform observing COVID fees. Now, one of the major ones that you will you will come across is unauthorized building works. So, for example, if the lands Department sees you, sees a building, and then also there is a balcony that is kind of now have walls, they may take action to say that, no, you\'re not allowed to do that because it\'s an unauthorized building works in respect to the government lease, and if you do not rectify it, then we will come in. So that is an example. More well drafted prior leases would include such a greater re entry as regarded as a mutual COVID. Now, in addition to all these leases, one thing that you will you will learn in a few classes from now, is that you have something called the data mutual COVID. It\'s a DMC, which basically is if you are living in multi sort building that also have certain covenants that the tenant is also must abide by, similar to the landlord. So reaching that may also end up reaching or having the government come in, or basically, possibly affecting your beach of the government lease. Now this is in addition to what we talk about is private leases for the most part, but confidence you may be exercised by taking out an action of carbon protection report or by self help. Self Help just means that you go in yourself. Gun is blazing. Now obviously, again, you have to be proportionate proceeds to the own court. We actually must be exercised peacefully. So having tried, may not be a good way of doing it. Otherwise, nano may be liable towards the liability. It\'s a better result even criminality. So Section 23 of the public where landlord proceeds by court action, then service of writ, containing a demand for possession itself, an effective re entry, not withstanding enforcement is simply affected only after judgment. For this reason, a landlord is entitled to bread up to the time of the service of the Brit and when they profit. Similarly, if the tenant accepts lands decision upon service rent, the landlord may not change his mind. The forfeiture is sought for non payment bread. A formal demand must be made by the landlord before we entry, unless the police excludes the needs to do so. A formal demand requires landlord or agent seeking for which it\'s demand exact some due on the date that it falls due on the premises and continuing Intel, sunset, it\'s basically the mountains actually do not what you investigate as the procedures quite archaic. Well, Japanese provide that right of re entry is a sub or whether or not formal demand has been made. Alternatively, where rent is least six months in a rear and value of goods on the premises there may be strained. Would not to cover the cost of arrears. A formal demand is unnecessary, such as 69 the Supreme Court, 20 1g of the High Court, da one of the CBO, requires landlord seeking forward to serve a notice on the tenant before accessing the notice bus, and those are things that you can read yourself. Landlord may only exercise for re entry if the fails because of all time they\'re out for every section D. Does that apply to breaches COVID, against signing under letting so on so forth. So I\'ll leave that for you to read wedding on time. I Okay, so there are certain breaches that are can be kind of remedied. So these are some examples of one. So obviously, if you breach it, if you remedy it, then technically you can go on with everyone\'s lives and not forfeit the lease or without the owners coming in. Now, if you were to go before a court, what you find is that, in practice, although you don\'t pay the rent and technically you can go in, the courts usually give the tenant the benefit of doubt a lot of the time, I mean, a lot of the time I tried, in several cases to pick out someone, and it\'s the court to say, ah, give us more time. Give me more time. So that is just a practice Rugby School governor and Kenneth Hill, at least contain a covenant for him to use purposes for moral purpose. Is when the premise were used as a brothel, the landlord sock to fulfill for the lease, but in its notice, it did not require tenants to breach the questions whether the notice complied with law. Now, in this certain, certain situation, do we know what a brothel is? We know what a brothel is, right, explaining this in great detail. It\'s a place where people go and have sex paper. Now, this is considered to be a moral purpose, and it\'s absolutely not irremediated. There is stigmas that is going to be all that. So if you\'re not allowed to, you\'re not allowed to do that there. If you do it, it\'s you\'re not going to be able to remedy it by by changing it to a pet store with cute dogs. It doesn\'t work. It doesn\'t will not remedy the breach. The breach was of a covenant after the sign of suffering possession level, issued notice, 40 days. Let you read that all these are examples. I really read that we have five minutes. It\'s section 52 of CPO further provides a tenant may apply to court for relief against forfeiture. This is important, although the language would be to appear to suggest the relief is only available before forfeiture is complete, those who are held at the court may nevertheless grant relief if Lana proceeds by peaceful reentry and has already affected entry only re entry following a court action, grant the tenant from seeking relief under Section 52 so although they can go In and take the premises, the tenants do have way of relief. Hey, if relief is granted subject to conditions, forfeiture is expended, and an lease will continue until time of compliance with the conditions have expired. Conditions have been complied with additional equitable jurisdiction to grant relief is open to doubt. Contrast this case, yeah, take, take the position that it, it is, it\'s not in doubt. Section 58 procedures do not apply to government leases, which are instead government, government rights and re entry, vesting remedies, ordinance. So you should take a look at the 12 of the CPO they believe can be sought from the chief executive leadership board. So I know this is quite, quite in depth in terms of the remedies. I think all of this is just basically just understanding the procedures, not expecting anything to too much remedy, stress, okay, distress is an important distress, judicial common law, remedy that is now governed by part three of allowing tenants consolidation ordinance, unlike right of entry, the right of this strain. Need to express reserve. She starts by logic, enter the mice. Person to take possession of tenants belongings up to the value of unpaid rent. So you go in, taking the chairs, taking the coffee machine, everything that basically pays for the rent. Sections 77 no restrictions, the value, property stream. So this is more of the strain. See what else is important. I think this is all stuff you can read. I don\'t need to read out to you. Okay, all this is dealing with contractual remedies in terms of damages, okay, termination. So these are the various types of ways that a the lease can be terminated. So I will only one that I think it\'s important is to notice to quit those quit is basically that you sent a letter to say that within this much time now you must leave the premise because there is a particular breach. Lately, I\'ve been doing a lot of housing for some reason, and my clients getting sent those to quit because in their form for public housing, but they decided that, oh, I am going to because you have to declare if you have other properties, and someone looked up and they basically get the properties taken, surrender for you to read, forfeiture. Disclaimer. Burgers, frustration, frustration, frustration, contract itself. Determination of a breach. So gone through that very quickly. Now this is all basically, in my opinion, not that difficult, although this is describing covenants and how you should probably reach our examples. Now, how am I going to be testing this? It\'s very simple, okay, I can ask you a question, starting from landlord one, Lisa\'s landlord two, tenant one decides to assign to tenant two, then to tenant three, then sub tenant and then decide just to then leave for whatever. Okay, and then landlord one signs it to landlord two, landlord three and so forth. Can you sue tenant X or sub tenant for this particular covenant, usual COVID? And then you\'ll tell me all about whether you can sue them. First, was it enforceable? And then you tell me whether this covenant, what is the covenant, for example, as a usual covenant, right? And then you can tell me, what are the remedies. So that is basically the whole picture of how you will present this in your staff. So next week, what I\'ve provided to you is basically a long problem question that basically deals with, I mean, I think that question covers every, almost every possible topic in leases, and spend quite a bit of time putting that together. So hopefully next week, when you do that problem, you kind of see how it all works. All right, that\'s it. So there are tutorials this week, and in addition, you should start reviewing classes, mortgages, which is even more fun, more of these confusing ways, tenants, and tenants assign tenant ones, covenant, covenant Chan.