UDL KENWORTH ENGINEERING LTD. v. AIRPORT AUTHORITY HONG KONG AND ANOTHER

UDL KENWORTH ENGINEERING LTD. v. AIRPORT AUTHORITY HONG KONG AND ANOTHER

The ex parte injunctions were discharged because the 1st Defendant's demand on the irrevocable on-demand bond was not shown to be fraudulent and was made honestly on Nishimatsu's representations, and because the Plaintiff materially non-disclosed a signed agreement letter in the ex parte application.

Citation
UDL KENWORTH ENGINEERING LTD. v. AIRPORT AUTHORITY HONG KONG AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: UDL KENWORTH ENGINEERING LIMITED; 1st Defendant: AIRPORT AUTHORITY HONG KONG; 2nd Defendant: AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 June 1998
Case Number
HCA8431/1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Interlocutory Injunction Relating to Performance Bond / Inter Partes Summons/hearing of Injunction (post Ex Parte Order)
Outcome
Ex parte injunctions discharged; costs awarded to defendants
Legal Topics
Performance Bond, On Demand Bond, Injunction, Repudiation, Ex Parte Non Disclosure
Source Language
EN
Contract Equity Construction Law Commercial Law Performance Bond On Demand Bond Injunction Repudiation +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UDL KENWORTH ENGINEERING LIMITED

Plaintiff

AIRPORT AUTHORITY HONG KONG

1st Defendant

AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Interlocutory Injunction Relating to Performance Bond / Inter Partes Summons/hearing of Injunction (post Ex Parte Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether demand on an irrevocable on-demand performance bond was bona fide or fraudulent
  2. 2 Whether interlocutory injunction should restrain payment under an on-demand bond
  3. 3 Whether the subcontractor or the contractor repudiated the subcontract

Ratio Decidendi

The ex parte injunctions were discharged because the 1st Defendant's demand on the irrevocable on-demand bond was not shown to be fraudulent and was made honestly on Nishimatsu's representations, and because the Plaintiff materially non-disclosed a signed agreement letter in the ex parte application.

Court Disposition

Ex parte injunctions discharged; costs awarded to defendants

Orders

  • Ex parte injunctions of 23 May 1998 discharged
  • Costs of the inter partes summons to be paid to the Defendants