WISE MARK TECHNOLOGY LTD AND ANOTHER v. WINCOME HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER

WISE MARK TECHNOLOGY LTD AND ANOTHER v. WINCOME HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER

Time for raising requisitions under Clause 5 ran from delivery of the title documents supplied by the plaintiff and did not await delivery of every historical or missing document the defendant later requested; the 1899 Assignment did not go to the root of title required to be proved under Section 13 and therefore the New requisitions were raised out of time; defendant breached the Agreement by failing to complete and plaintiff validly accepted repudiation and is entitled to loss-of-bargain damages minus deposits.

Citation
WISE MARK TECHNOLOGY LTD AND ANOTHER v. WINCOME HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Wise Mark Technology Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: CHAN HIN GEUNG MARK and HO SAU YEE; 1st Defendant: Wincome Holdings Limited; 2nd Defendant: AU SAU WAH also known as AU SAU WAH AMY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 February 2001
Case Number
HCA12867/1998
Procedural Posture
Contract (sale and Purchase of Property) / Judgment (court of First Instance Trial)
Outcome
Judgment for the 1st Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Requisitions on Title, Time Limits for Objections, Proof of Title Under Conveyancing and Property Ordinance (cap.219), Repudiation and Acceptance, Assessment of Damages (loss of Bargain), Mitigation
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Property Law Civil Procedure Requisitions on Title Time Limits for Objections Proof of Title Under Conveyancing and Property Ordinance (cap.219) Repudiation and Acceptance Assessment of Damages (loss of Bargain) +1 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 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wise Mark Technology Limited

1st Plaintiff

CHAN HIN GEUNG MARK and HO SAU YEE

2nd Plaintiff

Wincome Holdings Limited

1st Defendant

AU SAU WAH also known as AU SAU WAH AMY

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract (sale and Purchase of Property) / Judgment (court of First Instance Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time to raise requisitions under Clause 5 starts to run only after all title documents the vendor is obliged to deliver have been supplied
  2. 2 Whether the New requisitions raised out of time went to the root of the title and therefore could be validly raised after the contractual time limit
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff failed to mitigate loss by refusing to accept the defendant's offer to answer requisitions and complete

Ratio Decidendi

Time for raising requisitions under Clause 5 ran from delivery of the title documents supplied by the plaintiff and did not await delivery of every historical or missing document the defendant later requested; the 1899 Assignment did not go to the root of title required to be proved under Section 13 and therefore the New requisitions were raised out of time; defendant breached the Agreement by failing to complete and plaintiff validly accepted repudiation and is entitled to loss-of-bargain damages minus deposits.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the 1st Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment for the 1st Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant in the sum of $2,790,000 with interest from the date of writ to payment at the judgement rate.
  • Dismissal of the 1st Defendant's counterclaim.