FONG CHUN WING v. YEE YIP ENTERPRISES LTD. AND OTHERS

FONG CHUN WING v. YEE YIP ENTERPRISES LTD. AND OTHERS

Court found on the balance of probabilities that (a) Chung Tung was part of the joint redevelopment and effectively represented in dealings though not a named signatory on the Redevelopment Agreement; (b) rectification was not established for either party (neither the area nor the $85/sq.ft. rate); (c) implied terms were limited: piling and foundations were to be completed within a reasonable time and with due diligence but the superstructure completion was governed by an express term of 540 good weather working days (with only limited room for extension certified by architect); (d) no entitlement to 10% per annum delay interest under the Redevelopment Agreement was made out; (e)...

Citation
FONG CHUN WING v. YEE YIP ENTERPRISES LTD. AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Fong Chun Wing; 1st Defendant: Yee Yip Enterprises Ltd.; 2nd Defendant: Chung Tung Investment Ltd.; 3rd Defendant: Messrs Samuel Soo & Co.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 April 1988
Case Number
HCA4398/1985
Procedural Posture
Civil (property Redevelopment and Contract) / Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff on specified claims; rectification claims dismissed; defendants' counterclaim to counterclaim dismissed; costs reserved for further argument.
Legal Topics
Rectification, Implied Terms (reasonable Time and Due Diligence), Completion Time and Delay, Liquidated Damages, Agency and Representation, Assignment and Conveyancing, Development Costs and Apportionment, Damages for Non‑assignment, Building Contract Certification
Source Language
EN
Property Law Contract Law Construction Law Equity (rectification) Agency Law Mortgage and Security Rectification Implied Terms (reasonable Time and Due Diligence) +7 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fong Chun Wing

Plaintiff

Yee Yip Enterprises Ltd.

1st Defendant

Chung Tung Investment Ltd.

2nd Defendant

Messrs Samuel Soo & Co.

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property Redevelopment and Contract) / Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Chung Tung was a party to or represented by Yee Yip in the Redevelopment Agreement and oral bargain
  2. 2 Whether the Redevelopment Agreement should be rectified to reflect plaintiff's alleged promises (area and unit cost)
  3. 3 Whether there was an implied term for completion within a reasonable time or for due diligence and whether defendants breached it

Ratio Decidendi

Court found on the balance of probabilities that (a) Chung Tung was part of the joint redevelopment and effectively represented in dealings though not a named signatory on the Redevelopment Agreement; (b) rectification was not established for either party (neither the area nor the $85/sq.ft. rate); (c) implied terms were limited: piling and foundations were to be completed within a reasonable time and with due diligence but the superstructure completion was governed by an express term of 540 good weather working days (with only limited room for extension certified by architect); (d) no entitlement to 10% per annum delay interest under the Redevelopment Agreement was made out; (e)...

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff on specified claims; rectification claims dismissed; defendants' counterclaim to counterclaim dismissed; costs reserved for further argument.

Orders

  • No rectification of the Redevelopment Agreement granted for either side
  • Plaintiff awarded HKD 277,395 for shortfall in area