LI HOI SANG v. CHAN LAP WING ALAN

LI HOI SANG v. CHAN LAP WING ALAN

On the facts and credibility assessment the First Quotation was a contract inclusive of materials (except item 17); the defendant did not instruct the variations alleged by the plaintiff; the Second Quotation was not shown to have been genuinely provided in July 2007 and was self-serving; the plaintiff's quantum meruit claim therefore failed; defendant's tender of $61,000 into court stood; claim dismissed save that plaintiff is entitled to the $61,000 paid into court; order nisi for plaintiff to pay defendant's costs to be taxed if not agreed.

Citation
LI HOI SANG v. CHAN LAP WING ALAN
Parties
Plaintiff: Li Hoi Sang; Defendant: Chan Lap Wing Alan
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 October 2013
Case Number
DCCJ873/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract/quantum Meruit / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed; plaintiff entitled to the $61,000 paid into court; order nisi that plaintiff pay defendant's costs to be taxed if not agreed; no order as to costs for defendant's further discovery on 22 August 2012.
Legal Topics
Quantum Meruit, Variation of Contract, Quotation, Tender Before Action, Contra Proferentem, Expert Evidence, Witness Credibility, Hearsay
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Restitution Construction Law Evidence Law Quantum Meruit Variation of Contract Quotation Tender Before Action +4 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Li Hoi Sang

Plaintiff

Chan Lap Wing Alan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract/quantum Meruit / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Quotation for $91,000 was inclusive of materials (save item 17)
  2. 2 Whether the defendant instructed variations to design and materials as alleged by the plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff provided the variation works and supplied changed materials

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts and credibility assessment the First Quotation was a contract inclusive of materials (except item 17); the defendant did not instruct the variations alleged by the plaintiff; the Second Quotation was not shown to have been genuinely provided in July 2007 and was self-serving; the plaintiff's quantum meruit claim therefore failed; defendant's tender of $61,000 into court stood; claim dismissed save that plaintiff is entitled to the $61,000 paid into court; order nisi for plaintiff to pay defendant's costs to be taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; plaintiff entitled to the $61,000 paid into court; order nisi that plaintiff pay defendant's costs to be taxed if not agreed; no order as to costs for defendant's further discovery on 22 August 2012.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim dismissed
  • Order that plaintiff be entitled to $61,000 paid into court