CHUN LEE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. AOKI CORPORATION

CHUN LEE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. AOKI CORPORATION

No implied retention clause could be established because the pleaded custom lacked the necessary precision and machinery and the court will not draft contractual mechanisms; on the O.14 test there was no triable issue as to the admitted retained sum and summary judgment was granted to plaintiffs for HK$620,000 with interest; the counterclaim was not struck out but required amendment and particularisation because as pleaded it was unparticularised and potentially abusive; specific procedural orders for discovery, inspection and experts were made and certain requests for particulars were refused.

Citation
CHUN LEE ENGINEERING CO LTD v. AOKI CORPORATION
Parties
Plaintiff: Chun Lee Engineering Co. Ltd.; Defendant: Aoki Corporation
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 May 1991
Case Number
HCCT19/1989
Procedural Posture
Construction (building Contract) / Summons for Directions in Chambers Including Order 14 Summary Judgment Application, Counterclaim Strike‑out Application and Particulars/discovery Timetable
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for plaintiffs for HK$620,000 with interest; counterclaim not struck out but ordered to be re‑amended and particularised; timetable orders for discovery, inspection and expert evidence; most requests for further particulars of the defence refused; stay of execution granted short term pending...
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (order 14), Interim Payment (order 29), Implied Terms and Trade Usage, Retention Clauses, Counterclaim and Particulars, Discovery and Expert Evidence, Stay of Execution, Interest on Judgment
Source Language
EN
Contract Construction Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment (order 14) Interim Payment (order 29) Implied Terms and Trade Usage Retention Clauses Counterclaim and Particulars +3 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 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chun Lee Engineering Co. Ltd.

Plaintiff

Aoki Corporation

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Construction (building Contract) / Summons for Directions in Chambers Including Order 14 Summary Judgment Application, Counterclaim Strike‑out Application and Particulars/discovery Timetable

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a term implying a retention clause could be implied by custom/usage into the subcontract
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs were entitled to summary judgment for HK$620,000 (Order 14)
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' unquantified counterclaim should be struck out under Order 18 r.19

Ratio Decidendi

No implied retention clause could be established because the pleaded custom lacked the necessary precision and machinery and the court will not draft contractual mechanisms; on the O.14 test there was no triable issue as to the admitted retained sum and summary judgment was granted to plaintiffs for HK$620,000 with interest; the counterclaim was not struck out but required amendment and particularisation because as pleaded it was unparticularised and potentially abusive; specific procedural orders for discovery, inspection and experts were made and certain requests for particulars were refused.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for plaintiffs for HK$620,000 with interest; counterclaim not struck out but ordered to be re‑amended and particularised; timetable orders for discovery, inspection and expert evidence; most requests for further particulars of the defence refused; stay of execution granted short term pending...

Orders

  • Summary judgment for plaintiffs for HK$620000.00 HKD
  • Interest on HK$620000.00 at judgment debt rate from 26 September 1990 until payment