POLYSET LTD. v. PANHANDAT LTD.

POLYSET LTD. v. PANHANDAT LTD.

The Plaintiff had wrongfully rescinded the agreement; the Defendant was entitled to forfeit HK$40,250,000 which extinguished the Defendant's assessed damages; the Plaintiff recovered HK$11,534,575.34 and thus costs were apportioned with Defendant entitled to 100% costs on liability and Plaintiff entitled to 20% of costs to reflect recovery, resulting in Plaintiff bearing 80% of Defendant's costs; the Plaintiff was awarded interest on HK$11,534,575.34 from date of issue to judgment at the Bank of East Asia 7-day fixed deposit rate and thereafter at judgment rate; the lis pendens was to be vacated.

Citation
POLYSET LTD. v. PANHANDAT LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff: POLYSET LIMITED; Defendant: PANHANDAT LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 January 2000
Case Number
HCMP1840/1998
Procedural Posture
Court of First Instance Miscellaneous Proceedings (originating Summons) / Judgment (consequential Orders)
Outcome
Judgment for the Defendant; Plaintiff's rescission held wrongful; Defendant entitled to forfeit deposit; Plaintiff to be repaid specified balance with interest; lis pendens vacated; Plaintiff to pay 80% of Defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
Rescission, Forfeiture of Deposit, Assessment of Damages, Pre Judgment Interest, Lis Pendens, Allocation of Costs
Source Language
EN
Contract Civil Procedure Property Costs Interest Rescission Forfeiture of Deposit Assessment of Damages +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

POLYSET LIMITED

Plaintiff

PANHANDAT LIMITED

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Court of First Instance Miscellaneous Proceedings (originating Summons) / Judgment (consequential Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff was entitled to costs despite losing on liability
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff was entitled to pre-judgment interest and at what rate
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff validly rescinded the contract

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff had wrongfully rescinded the agreement; the Defendant was entitled to forfeit HK$40,250,000 which extinguished the Defendant's assessed damages; the Plaintiff recovered HK$11,534,575.34 and thus costs were apportioned with Defendant entitled to 100% costs on liability and Plaintiff entitled to 20% of costs to reflect recovery, resulting in Plaintiff bearing 80% of Defendant's costs; the Plaintiff was awarded interest on HK$11,534,575.34 from date of issue to judgment at the Bank of East Asia 7-day fixed deposit rate and thereafter at judgment rate; the lis pendens was to be vacated.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Defendant; Plaintiff's rescission held wrongful; Defendant entitled to forfeit deposit; Plaintiff to be repaid specified balance with interest; lis pendens vacated; Plaintiff to pay 80% of Defendant's costs.

Orders

  • Declared that the Plaintiff had wrongfully rescinded the Agreement for Sale and Purchase dated 23 May 1997 and was in breach in failing to complete.
  • Declared that the Defendant is entitled to forfeit and retain HK$40,250,000.00 paid by the Plaintiff, which extinguishes the Defendant's assessed damages of HK$33,000,000.00.