## Facts

- The dispute concerned a lease of a basement space intended for use as a restaurant.
- Beaumont Property Trust Ltd was the landlord; Mr. Wong was the tenant.
- The lease obliged the tenant to comply with public health regulations.
- Compliance required installing a ventilation duct passing through areas controlled by the landlord.
- The landlord refused to permit installation of the necessary duct.

## Issues

1. Whether an easement for ventilation, essential for complying with health regulations and the lease's intended use, could be implied into the lease by mutual agreement.
2. Whether such an easement is distinct from an easement of necessity, which arises when land cannot be used without access.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal held that an easement for ventilation was implied by mutual agreement to support the restaurant use.
- Both parties were deemed to have understood, at the time of agreement, that operation as a restaurant was contingent on legally required ventilation.
- The implied easement was strictly limited to the purpose of complying with health regulations applicable to restaurant use.
- The court distinguished between easements implied by mutual agreement and those arising by necessity.
- The claim to the easement was upheld as necessary for the intended use under the lease.

## Legal Principles

- Courts may imply an easement by mutual agreement where the property's intended use, known to both parties at the outset, depends upon an unstated right.
- Such implied easements are strictly confined to what is required to enable the planned use and do not extend beyond the mutual understanding at the time of agreement.
- Easements of necessity differ, as they arise from the impossibility of using land without the easement, regardless of intent.
- Later cases have affirmed that the need for an implied easement must relate directly to the use intended at the time of the original arrangement, not to subsequent changes.

## Conclusion

Wong v Beaumont Property Trust Ltd establishes that courts can imply an easement by mutual agreement where it is necessary to achieve a property's planned use, but only to the limited extent strictly required by that use as contemplated by the parties when the agreement was made.

Wong v Beaumont Property Trust Ltd [1965] 1 QB 173