REAL MAKER DEVELOPMENT LTD v. COBOW CONTRACTING & ENGINEERING CO LTD

REAL MAKER DEVELOPMENT LTD v. COBOW CONTRACTING & ENGINEERING CO LTD

The court found plaintiff's documentary evidence (4/1/2002 fax, SEML transmission report and repossession checklists) credible and defendant's assertions of forgery and earlier surrender on 31 July 2001 incredible; no triable issue existed on the core dispute of possession; contractual interest at 1.5% per month was not a penalty on the evidence and plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment for arrears and contractual interest; costs ordered on full indemnity basis nisi.

Citation
REAL MAKER DEVELOPMENT LTD v. COBOW CONTRACTING & ENGINEERING CO LTD
Parties
Plaintiff: Real Maker Development Limited; Defendant: Cobow Contracting & Engineering Company Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 May 2005
Case Number
DCCJ6607/2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Landlord and Tenant / Debt Recovery / Order 14 Summary Judgment Application; Judgment Granted
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (order 14), Possession, Liquidated Damages Vs Penalty, Interest on Arrears, Forgery Allegation, Evidence Authenticity
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Contract Civil Procedure Property Debt Recovery Summary Judgment (order 14) Possession Liquidated Damages Vs Penalty +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Real Maker Development Limited

Plaintiff

Cobow Contracting & Engineering Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Landlord and Tenant / Debt Recovery / Order 14 Summary Judgment Application; Judgment Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant delivered vacant possession on 31 July 2001 or remained in occupation until 7 January 2002
  2. 2 Whether defendant liable for arrears of rent, rates, management fee and other outgoings
  3. 3 Whether contractual interest clause (1.5% per month) is a penalty or liquidated damages

Ratio Decidendi

The court found plaintiff's documentary evidence (4/1/2002 fax, SEML transmission report and repossession checklists) credible and defendant's assertions of forgery and earlier surrender on 31 July 2001 incredible; no triable issue existed on the core dispute of possession; contractual interest at 1.5% per month was not a penalty on the evidence and plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment for arrears and contractual interest; costs ordered on full indemnity basis nisi.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of HK$211,001.90
  • Interest on HK$140,312.90 at 1.5% per month (daily interest HK$70.16) from 1 December 2004 to date of judgment