GOODJOY DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. CHENG TAI PUI AND ANOTHER

GOODJOY DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. CHENG TAI PUI AND ANOTHER

Clause 16(3) governs recovery: the defendants contracted to pay the stated contract price ($5,091,492) so deficiency is measured from that contract price; the resale to an independent buyer within six months was bona fide; commission ($60,600) and legal costs ($20,000) are expenses attending the resale and recoverable; credit for the forfeited 10% deposit ($509,149.20) applies; judgment entered for plaintiff against 1st defendant for $622,942.80 plus interest from 20 July 1998.

Citation
GOODJOY DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. CHENG TAI PUI AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Goodjoy Development Limited; 1st Defendant: Cheng Tai-pui; 2nd Defendant: Or Kam-sau
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 September 2000
Case Number
HCA8765/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (contract) / Judgment (master's Decision)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff against 1st defendant in the sum of $622,942.80 plus interest at judgment rate from 20 July 1998; costs of assessment to plaintiff against 1st defendant, taxed if not agreed; no order for costs reserved on 17 February 2000.
Legal Topics
Liquidated Damages, Forfeiture of Deposit, Resale Deficiency, Agency Commission, Legal Costs, Assessment of Damages
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Property Law Civil Procedure Remedies Liquidated Damages Forfeiture of Deposit Resale Deficiency Agency Commission +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Goodjoy Development Limited

Plaintiff

Cheng Tai-pui

1st Defendant

Or Kam-sau

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (contract) / Judgment (master's Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper measure of resale deficiency (contract price v listed price)
  2. 2 Recoverability of resale expenses (agent commission and legal costs)
  3. 3 Application of clause 16(3) including six‑month resale limitation

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 16(3) governs recovery: the defendants contracted to pay the stated contract price ($5,091,492) so deficiency is measured from that contract price; the resale to an independent buyer within six months was bona fide; commission ($60,600) and legal costs ($20,000) are expenses attending the resale and recoverable; credit for the forfeited 10% deposit ($509,149.20) applies; judgment entered for plaintiff against 1st defendant for $622,942.80 plus interest from 20 July 1998.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff against 1st defendant in the sum of $622,942.80 plus interest at judgment rate from 20 July 1998; costs of assessment to plaintiff against 1st defendant, taxed if not agreed; no order for costs reserved on 17 February 2000.

Orders

  • Judgment for plaintiff against 1st defendant for $622,942.80
  • Interest at judgment rate from 20 July 1998 to date of judgment on the principal sum