TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. WONG SAI CHOI AND ANOTHER

TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. WONG SAI CHOI AND ANOTHER

The defence and counterclaim were struck out because the defendants failed to plead or particularise an implied term with a basis, failed to identify any actionable misrepresentation or contemporaneous evidence supporting it, and delay in completion was not a contractual ground to avoid completion; consequently...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. WONG SAI CHOI AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Tin Shui Wai Development Limited; 1st Defendant: Wong Sai Choi; 2nd Defendant: Pang Siu Hing
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 April 2008
Case Number
DCCJ648/2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Contract (sale and Purchase) / Application to Strike Out Defence and Counterclaim Under Order 18 R.19; Hearing of Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Defence and counterclaim struck out; judgment entered for plaintiff for damages to be assessed; costs ordered against defendants (nisi to be made absolute in 14 days).
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Completion of Sale and Purchase Agreement, Breach of Contract, Rescission, Misrepresentation, Damages, Costs
Source Language
en
Contract Law Civil Procedure Property Law Strike Out Completion of Sale and Purchase Agreement Breach of Contract Rescission Misrepresentation +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tin Shui Wai Development Limited

Plaintiff

Wong Sai Choi

1st Defendant

Pang Siu Hing

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Contract (sale and Purchase) / Application to Strike Out Defence and Counterclaim Under Order 18 R.19; Hearing of Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an implied term existed obliging the plaintiff to answer requisitions about completion by 31 December 1997
  2. 2 Whether alleged representations by plaintiff's staff constituted actionable misrepresentation causing defendants not to rescind
  3. 3 Whether delay in completing the development justified defendants' refusal to complete

Ratio Decidendi

The defence and counterclaim were struck out because the defendants failed to plead or particularise an implied term with a basis, failed to identify any actionable misrepresentation or contemporaneous evidence supporting it, and delay in completion was not a contractual ground to avoid completion; consequently their pleadings disclosed no reasonable defence and final judgment was entered for the plaintiff for damages to be assessed.

Court Disposition

Defence and counterclaim struck out; judgment entered for plaintiff for damages to be assessed; costs ordered against defendants (nisi to be made absolute in 14 days).

Orders

  • Defence and counterclaim struck out
  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiff for damages to be assessed