TRIDANT ENGINEERING CO. LTD. v. MANSION HOLDINGS LTD.

TRIDANT ENGINEERING CO. LTD. v. MANSION HOLDINGS LTD.

Leave to amend was granted because alternative and inconsistent pleadings are permissible and Mansion Holdings was entitled to plead a fall‑back agency case without detailed particulars; Tridant was ordered to serve a further verified list and explanations regarding as‑built drawings and financial documents because Tridant had not demonstrated reliability in disclosure; costs orders were made nisi allocating costs against Tridant for opposing the amendment and requiring Tridant to pay costs of the disclosure application in any event.

Citation
TRIDANT ENGINEERING CO. LTD. v. MANSION HOLDINGS LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff (con 3) and Defendant (con 66): Tridant Engineering Company Limited; Defendant (con 3): Mansion Holdings Limited; Plaintiff (con 66): Mansion Fire Engineering Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 February 1999
Case Number
HCCT3/1996
Procedural Posture
Civil: Contractual Dispute (novation and Agency) / Interim Applications for Leave to Amend Pleadings and for Further Verified List of Documents
Outcome
Leave to amend granted; order for further verified list of documents made; costs orders made nisi in favour of Mansion Holdings on specified terms.
Legal Topics
Consensual Novation, Agency (servant/agent and Principal Liability), Amendment of Pleadings, Discovery/verification of Documents, Costs Orders
Source Language
EN
Contract Agency Civil Procedure Disclosure Costs Consensual Novation Agency (servant/agent and Principal Liability) Amendment of Pleadings +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tridant Engineering Company Limited

Plaintiff (con 3) and Defendant (con 66)

Mansion Holdings Limited

Defendant (con 3)

Mansion Fire Engineering Company Limited

Plaintiff (con 66)

Procedural Posture

Civil: Contractual Dispute (novation and Agency) / Interim Applications for Leave to Amend Pleadings and for Further Verified List of Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mansion Holdings should be granted leave to amend its defence and counterclaim to plead alternative and agency cases
  2. 2 Whether particulars of agency must be furnished where agency is pleaded only as an alternate/fall‑back case
  3. 3 Whether Tridant must serve a further verified list of documents including as‑built drawings approved by the architect and financial records

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend was granted because alternative and inconsistent pleadings are permissible and Mansion Holdings was entitled to plead a fall‑back agency case without detailed particulars; Tridant was ordered to serve a further verified list and explanations regarding as‑built drawings and financial documents because Tridant had not demonstrated reliability in disclosure; costs orders were made nisi allocating costs against Tridant for opposing the amendment and requiring Tridant to pay costs of the disclosure application in any event.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend granted; order for further verified list of documents made; costs orders made nisi in favour of Mansion Holdings on specified terms.

Orders

  • Leave granted to Mansion Holdings to amend its defence and counterclaim in Con 3 in terms of the summons dated 31 December 1998
  • Order that Tridant serve a further verified list of documents in terms of paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Mansion Holdings summons dated 2 February 1999, including as‑built construction drawings as approved by the architect and financial documents supporting alleged losses and expenses