Developing an Effective Recovery Strategy in a Case of Unrecovered Deposit Arising From a Leasing Agent's Unilateral Contract

1. The Client's Situation

The client had entered into a lease agreement for a particular piece of real estate and paid the deposit, but even after the lease ended it had not received the return of the deposit, and so requested legal advice. At the time of the lease agreement, ownership lay with a trust company, and the lessor concluded the contract in the capacity of a leasing agent, but without the prior consent of the trust company. The party responsible for the return was unclear, and in practical terms the deposit was not being returned.

Your Legal Team clarified that, under the structure of the contract, the trust company was not a party to the lease agreement, and that the landmark party alone had concluded the contract as the lessor. On the premise that the landmark party therefore bore the obligation to return the deposit, we presented recovery measures from various angles, such as the possibility of a provisional attachment and a payment order. In addition, we reviewed exceptional means of pursuing liability, such as the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil against the representative individually and the possibility of establishing a tort.

With Your Legal Team's assistance, the client was able to clearly grasp the target of the claim for return and where the legal liability lay, and to establish an effective recovery strategy, including applications for a provisional attachment and a payment order against assets held in the landmark party's name. This served as an important foundation for taking preliminary measures to recover the deposit and for pursuing substantive benefit in future litigation and compulsory execution proceedings.