WIN WAVE INDUSTRIAL LTD v. GOSBON INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS

WIN WAVE INDUSTRIAL LTD v. GOSBON INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS

The court found that the estate agents, acting with apparent authority for Gosbon and armed with vendor documents, made representations that the property could be used for general commercial purposes; those representations were false at the time, were relied on and induced the plaintiff to contract; Gosbon's conduct amounted to fraudulent misrepresentation and the entire agreement clause could not exclude liability for fraud; the agents breached their duty to take reasonable care in verifying and passing on information, and Win Wave was entitled to rescind and recover the deposit and damages; liability apportioned 85% to Gosbon and 15% to Centaline.

Citation
WIN WAVE INDUSTRIAL LTD v. GOSBON INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Win Wave Industrial Limited; 1st Defendant: Gosbon Industries Limited; 2nd Defendant: Centaline Property Agency Limited; 3rd Defendant: Chung Mei Wah; 4th Defendant: Lai Yiu Kai Alan
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 April 2009
Case Number
DCCJ209/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (misrepresentation, Negligent Misstatement, Rescission, Damages) / Judgment (district Court, 27 April 2009)
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff: provisional agreement rescinded; damages awarded; costs to plaintiff; apportionment of liability between Gosbon and Centaline
Legal Topics
Rescission, Fraudulent Misrepresentation (deceit), Negligent Misstatement, Entire Agreement Clause, Duty of Care, Vicarious Liability, Damages, Change of Land User
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Tort Agency Law Property Law Professional Negligence Statutory Regulation of Estate Agents Rescission Fraudulent Misrepresentation (deceit) +6 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Win Wave Industrial Limited

Plaintiff

Gosbon Industries Limited

1st Defendant

Centaline Property Agency Limited

2nd Defendant

Chung Mei Wah

3rd Defendant

Lai Yiu Kai Alan

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (misrepresentation, Negligent Misstatement, Rescission, Damages) / Judgment (district Court, 27 April 2009)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether representations about change of user were made
  2. 2 Whether representations were false
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff was induced and relied on representations

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the estate agents, acting with apparent authority for Gosbon and armed with vendor documents, made representations that the property could be used for general commercial purposes; those representations were false at the time, were relied on and induced the plaintiff to contract; Gosbon's conduct amounted to fraudulent misrepresentation and the entire agreement clause could not exclude liability for fraud; the agents breached their duty to take reasonable care in verifying and passing on information, and Win Wave was entitled to rescind and recover the deposit and damages; liability apportioned 85% to Gosbon and 15% to Centaline.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff: provisional agreement rescinded; damages awarded; costs to plaintiff; apportionment of liability between Gosbon and Centaline

Orders

  • Declaration that Win Wave was entitled to rescind and has validly rescinded the provisional agreement
  • Judgment against the 4 Defendants for damages in the sum of HK$505,060