STAREX DEVELOPMENT LTD v. YAU SO CHING as the administrator of the estate of YEUNG LEUNG CHUEN, the deceased AND OTHERS
Clause 10 must be read as a whole: where clause 10(1) occurs, the purchaser's election to continue or forgo is exercisable on or before the completion date (28 April 2020) as expressly stated in clause 10(b); implying an earlier deadline would contradict the express wording and is unnecessary for business efficacy; plaintiff did not unequivocally elect, waive or become estopped by conduct after 30 July 2019; therefore plaintiff validly terminated under clause 10(b), is entitled to return of deposits and judgment in its favour, and defendants' counterclaims fail.
- Citation
- [2023] HKDC 96
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Starex Development Limited; 1st Defendant: Yau So Ching (as administrator of the Estate of Yeung Leung Chuen); 2nd Defendant: Yau Yam Sing (as administrator of the Estate of Yeung Leung Chuen); 3rd Defendant: Yau Yam Sing; 4th Defendant: Yau Yum Cheung
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 13 February 2023
- Case Number
- DCCJ2374/2021
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Action (district Court) / Determination Under Order 14 A; Summary Judgment and Striking Out Applications; Final Decision
- Outcome
- Final judgment entered for plaintiff against 1st to 4th defendants; consolidated counterclaims dismissed; alternatively summary judgment for plaintiff and counterclaims struck out
- Legal Topics
- Construction of Contract, Implied Terms, Election of Remedies, Waiver, Estoppel, Summary Judgment, Striking Out
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Starex Development Limited
Plaintiff
Yau So Ching (as administrator of the Estate of Yeung Leung Chuen)
1st Defendant
Yau Yam Sing (as administrator of the Estate of Yeung Leung Chuen)
2nd Defendant
Yau Yam Sing
3rd Defendant
Yau Yum Cheung
4th Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (district Court) / Determination Under Order 14 A; Summary Judgment and Striking Out Applications; Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Proper construction of clause 10 of provisional sale and purchase agreements: whether purchaser had to elect to proceed by 30 July 2019 or by completion date 28 April 2020
- 2 Whether an implied term making time of the essence/election date 30 July 2019 should be implied
- 3 Whether plaintiff's post-30 July conduct constituted election, waiver or estoppel preventing termination under clause 10(b)
Ratio Decidendi
Clause 10 must be read as a whole: where clause 10(1) occurs, the purchaser's election to continue or forgo is exercisable on or before the completion date (28 April 2020) as expressly stated in clause 10(b); implying an earlier deadline would contradict the express wording and is unnecessary for business efficacy; plaintiff did not unequivocally elect, waive or become estopped by conduct after 30 July 2019; therefore plaintiff validly terminated under clause 10(b), is entitled to return of deposits and judgment in its favour, and defendants' counterclaims fail.
Court Disposition
Final judgment entered for plaintiff against 1st to 4th defendants; consolidated counterclaims dismissed; alternatively summary judgment for plaintiff and counterclaims struck out
Orders
- Final judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd defendants and against the 3rd and 4th defendants
- Consolidated Counterclaims of the defendants dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment