HARVEST REGENT DEVELOPMENT LTD v. WING HUNG HAY CO LTD

HARVEST REGENT DEVELOPMENT LTD v. WING HUNG HAY CO LTD

The claim was struck out because the alleged oral collateral agreement was legally unenforceable on its face for lack of essential terms (notably duration) and, more importantly, the subsequent written lease contained an unequivocal entire agreement clause which precluded any collateral oral warranty from having contractual effect; accordingly the statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and the Master's strike out was correct.

Citation
HARVEST REGENT DEVELOPMENT LTD v. WING HUNG HAY CO LTD
Parties
Plaintiff (hca746/2006); Defendant (hca1047/2006): Harvest Regent Development Limited; Defendant (hca746/2006); Plaintiff (hca1047/2006): Wing Hung Hay Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 October 2006
Case Number
HCA746/2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal Landlord and Tenant (civil) / Appeal Against Master Ho's Strike Out Decision; Hearing in Chambers; Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Master's strike out order upheld; costs awarded to respondent.
Legal Topics
Entire Agreement Clause, Collateral Contract, Strike Out Under Order 18 R 19, Summary Judgment (order 14), Stay of Execution
Source Language
EN
Contract Property Civil Procedure Entire Agreement Clause Collateral Contract Strike Out Under Order 18 R 19 Summary Judgment (order 14) Stay of Execution

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harvest Regent Development Limited

Plaintiff (hca746/2006); Defendant (hca1047/2006)

Wing Hung Hay Company Limited

Defendant (hca746/2006); Plaintiff (hca1047/2006)

Procedural Posture

Appeal Landlord and Tenant (civil) / Appeal Against Master Ho's Strike Out Decision; Hearing in Chambers; Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenant's pleaded oral collateral agreement disclosed a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the alleged oral collateral agreement was void for vagueness/uncertainty (in particular duration)
  3. 3 Whether an entire agreement clause in the signed lease precluded reliance on any collateral oral agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out because the alleged oral collateral agreement was legally unenforceable on its face for lack of essential terms (notably duration) and, more importantly, the subsequent written lease contained an unequivocal entire agreement clause which precluded any collateral oral warranty from having contractual effect; accordingly the statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and the Master's strike out was correct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Master's strike out order upheld; costs awarded to respondent.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Strike out of the tenant's statement of claim affirmed under Order 18 r 19