OR HEI BUN ALFRED AND ANOTHER V. CITILINE PROPERTIES AGENCY

OR HEI BUN ALFRED AND ANOTHER V. CITILINE PROPERTIES AGENCY

The appeal was allowed because the claimant's promise to waive the outstanding service charge was relied upon by the defendants and thus gave rise to a binding promissory estoppel in equity without consideration; alternatively, signing the provisional sale and purchase agreement and appointing the claimant as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
OR HEI BUN ALFRED AND ANOTHER V. CITILINE PROPERTIES AGENCY
Parties
Respondent/claimant: CITILINE PROPERTIES AGENCY; 1st Appellant/defendant: OR HEI BUN ALFRED; 2nd Appellant/defendant: JOHNNY S.J. WONG
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 February 1993
Case Number
HCSA14/1992
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal Appeal / Decision on Appeal (judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; award and costs order against defendants set aside
Legal Topics
Waiver, Promissory Estoppel, Consideration, Variation of Contract, Service Charges/commission
Source Language
en
Contract Equity Estoppel Agency Civil Procedure Waiver Promissory Estoppel Consideration +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CITILINE PROPERTIES AGENCY

Respondent/claimant

OR HEI BUN ALFRED

1st Appellant/defendant

JOHNNY S.J. WONG

2nd Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal Appeal / Decision on Appeal (judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's promise to waive outstanding service charges constituted a binding waiver or promissory estoppel
  2. 2 Whether such a waiver required consideration or was enforceable in equity without consideration
  3. 3 Whether the defendants relied on the promise so as to alter their position

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the claimant's promise to waive the outstanding service charge was relied upon by the defendants and thus gave rise to a binding promissory estoppel in equity without consideration; alternatively, signing the provisional sale and purchase agreement and appointing the claimant as commissioned agent constituted valid consideration for a contractual variation, so in either view the claimant was precluded from enforcing the outstanding charge.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; award and costs order against defendants set aside

Orders

  • Award of $10,750 and costs $200 made by the Small Claims Tribunal on 25 August 1992 set aside
  • Appeal allowed with costs