Living in an Auckland property as squatters rent-free gave Yong Sheng Bei and his wife no rights of continued occupation when told to leave. They had lived at the Onehunga property for nearly ten years with the tacit approval of a company controlled by their son.
B&Z Trades Company Ltd purchased the Galway Street property in 2010. At time of this purchase, B&Z was controlled by their son Yao Ping.
No objection was made to his father Yong Sheng living at the Galway Street house. The property was used in part for B&Z’s business of importing used cars.
Family differences arose when Yao Ping decided in 2022 to sell Galway Street. He told his father that it was time to move. Yong Sheng wanted to stay. Multiple litigation followed.
B&Z’s Tenancy Tribunal application to evict Yong Sheng was dismissed. There was no tenancy agreement for the Tribunal to consider.
Yong Sheng’s claim in the High Court to be in partnership with his son and with it continued use of Galway Street as a partnership asset was dismissed.
Associate judge Brittain ruled Yong Sheng’s occupation was that of a bare licence to occupy, which could be cancelled at any time.
In legal jargon: a licence to occupy, given without consideration, is revocable at will.
Yong Sheng was not paying rent or providing any other benefit to B&Z to justify a continued right of occupation.
His licence to occupy was revoked when told B&Z was going to sell, Judge Brittain said.
Any person in occupation as a bare licensee is entitle to a reasonable time to vacate, he ruled.
Yong Sheng was given four weeks.
B&Z Trades Company Ltd v. Yong Sheng Bei – High Court (27.05.24)
24.140