C & W WATCH CO LTD v. CHU KWOK TAI

C & W WATCH CO LTD v. CHU KWOK TAI

Agreement cl.6(a) manifested a contrary intention to CPO s.13 by requiring title to be proved commencing with the Government Lease; therefore the purchaser was entitled to request the eight original documents, the vendor's failure to produce them or provide a statutory declaration was a breach permitting the purchaser to treat the contract as rescinded, and the purchaser is entitled to return of the $107,000 deposit while the vendor's counterclaim for damages is dismissed (claimed damages were less than the deposit).

Citation
C & W WATCH CO LTD v. CHU KWOK TAI
Parties
Purchaser: C & W Watch Company Limited; Vendor: Chu Kwok Tai
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 October 2005
Case Number
HCMP920/2005
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (hcmp 920/2005) / Judgment (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff: CW Watch entitled to return of $107,000 deposit; defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Title Proof, Conveyancing and Property Ordinance S.13, Rescission of Contract, Deposit, Damages
Source Language
EN
Property Contract Civil Procedure Title Proof Conveyancing and Property Ordinance S.13 Rescission of Contract Deposit Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C & W Watch Company Limited

Purchaser

Chu Kwok Tai

Vendor

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings (hcmp 920/2005) / Judgment (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether purchaser was entitled to require production of eight original documents requested pre-completion
  2. 2 Whether purchaser was entitled to treat the agreement as rescinded for vendor's failure to produce documents
  3. 3 Whether vendor was entitled to retain the $107,000 deposit and claim further damages

Ratio Decidendi

Agreement cl.6(a) manifested a contrary intention to CPO s.13 by requiring title to be proved commencing with the Government Lease; therefore the purchaser was entitled to request the eight original documents, the vendor's failure to produce them or provide a statutory declaration was a breach permitting the purchaser to treat the contract as rescinded, and the purchaser is entitled to return of the $107,000 deposit while the vendor's counterclaim for damages is dismissed (claimed damages were less than the deposit).

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff: CW Watch entitled to return of $107,000 deposit; defendant's counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Return $107000 deposit to C & W Watch Company Limited
  • Dismiss Chu Kwok Tai's counterclaim for damages