WHARF PROPERTIES LTD AND ANOTHER v. ERIC CUMINE ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS (A FIRM) AND OTHERS

WHARF PROPERTIES LTD AND ANOTHER v. ERIC CUMINE ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS (A FIRM) AND OTHERS

The proposed sub-paragraphs were properly regarded as further particulars of the pleaded cause of action (failure to apply for or obtain plot ratio exemptions) rather than new causes of action; on the affidavits before the court the amendments were not shown to be time-barred and the defendants had not discharged the burden of proving limitation; allowing the amendments would not cause injustice because the defendants could deal with them, therefore leave to amend was granted.

Citation
WHARF PROPERTIES LTD AND ANOTHER v. ERIC CUMINE ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS (A FIRM) AND OTHERS
Parties
First Plaintiff: Wharf Properties Limited; Second Plaintiff: The Wharf (Holdings) Limited; First Defendant: Eric Cumine Associates; Defendant (firm): Architects Engineers & Surveyors (A firm)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 May 1987
Case Number
HCA13431/1983
Procedural Posture
Civil Action — Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Pleadings / Chambers Hearing on Summons for Amendment (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application for leave to amend granted
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Cause of Action, Limitation Period, Res Judicata, Continuing Duty, Pleading Particulars
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Limitation Law Professional Negligence Property/planning Law Amendment of Pleadings Cause of Action Limitation Period Res Judicata +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wharf Properties Limited

First Plaintiff

The Wharf (Holdings) Limited

Second Plaintiff

Eric Cumine Associates

First Defendant

Architects Engineers & Surveyors (A firm)

Defendant (firm)

Procedural Posture

Civil Action — Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Pleadings / Chambers Hearing on Summons for Amendment (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed amendments introduce new causes of action or are further particulars of the pleaded cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments are statute-barred by limitation statutes prior to writ or before 27 July 1984
  3. 3 Whether the court has power to allow amendments if a defendant had an accrued limitation defence before 27 July 1984

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed sub-paragraphs were properly regarded as further particulars of the pleaded cause of action (failure to apply for or obtain plot ratio exemptions) rather than new causes of action; on the affidavits before the court the amendments were not shown to be time-barred and the defendants had not discharged the burden of proving limitation; allowing the amendments would not cause injustice because the defendants could deal with them, therefore leave to amend was granted.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to amend granted

Orders

  • Leave granted to amend the substituted statement of claim as per the summons (sub-paragraphs 1–3 permitted)
  • Costs to be determined/discussed between counsel and the Court