LEADER CIVIL ENGINEERING CORPORATION LTD. v. WELL-PRO ENGINEERING LTD.

LEADER CIVIL ENGINEERING CORPORATION LTD. v. WELL-PRO ENGINEERING LTD.

The Court held the judge was entitled to refuse to set aside the default judgment for claims relating to the alleged omitted works and maintenance because Well-Pro failed to adduce evidence showing a real prospect of success or that Leader's claim was excessive; only the portion relating to the alleged loans (over...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
LEADER CIVIL ENGINEERING CORPORATION LTD. v. WELL-PRO ENGINEERING LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Leader Civil Engineering Corporation Limited; Defendant/applicant: Well-Pro Engineering Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 March 1998
Case Number
CACV264/1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in part; default judgment set aside only as to the loan claim; remainder of default judgment upheld; cross-appeal on costs allowed.
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Setting Aside Judgment, Subcontractor Liability, Maintenance Obligations, Damages, Contracharge, Costs Order
Source Language
en
Contract Civil Procedure Construction Law Costs Default Judgment Setting Aside Judgment Subcontractor Liability Maintenance Obligations +3 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leader Civil Engineering Corporation Limited

Plaintiff/respondent

Well-Pro Engineering Limited

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether default judgment should be set aside in whole or in part
  2. 2 Whether Leader's claim for over $5.5 million was excessive or outside pleaded/claimed sums
  3. 3 Construction and legal effect of the parties' 'contracharge' correspondence/agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the judge was entitled to refuse to set aside the default judgment for claims relating to the alleged omitted works and maintenance because Well-Pro failed to adduce evidence showing a real prospect of success or that Leader's claim was excessive; only the portion relating to the alleged loans (over $9 million) was properly set aside, and the costs order of the judge was incorrect and replaced with the usual costs order against Well-Pro.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in part; default judgment set aside only as to the loan claim; remainder of default judgment upheld; cross-appeal on costs allowed.

Orders

  • Default judgment set aside insofar as it related to the alleged loans of over $9,000,000
  • Default judgment upheld in respect of damages of over $5,500,000 for alleged omitted works and damages to be assessed for maintenance claim