Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Concurrent obligations

Legal area

Court

13 Jun 2011

SHANDONG HONGRI ACRON CHEMICAL JOINT STOCK CO LTD v. PETROCHINA INTERNATIONAL (HONG KONG) CORPORATION LTD

Citation

SHANDONG HONGRI ACRON CHEMICAL JOINT STOCK CO LTD v. PETROCHINA INTERNATIONAL (HONG KONG) CORPORATION LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV31/2011

Although the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to order security for costs on appeal, the court will decline to exercise that discretion against an award creditor enforcing a foreign/Mainland arbitral award where the enforcement context and Convention-related policy considerations constitute a countervailing factor; accordingly, security for costs was refused in this appeal and the application dismissed.
6 Aug 2010

SHANDONG HONGRI ACRON CHEMICAL JOINT STOCK CO LTD v. PETROCHINA INTERNATIONAL (HONG KONG) CORPORATION LTD

Citation

SHANDONG HONGRI ACRON CHEMICAL JOINT STOCK CO LTD v. PETROCHINA INTERNATIONAL (HONG KONG) CORPORATION LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT45/2009

The court varied the ex parte order nisi to grant leave to Petrochina to register and enforce paragraph 1 of the CIETAC award (return of 3,810.578 tonnes of sulphur) as a judgment, ordered Shandong Hongri to return the goods forthwith, stayed execution of any judgment pending further order, and directed that the legal question about the effect of the tribunal's supplementary letters be determined by a contested O14A hearing; the court held partial enforcement is permissible and parity requires portions favourable to both parties may be registered, while reserving the nondisclosure issue for f…
6 Dec 2000

TEAM LEADER DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. TANG PAK CHUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

TEAM LEADER DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. TANG PAK CHUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA11746/1997

Plaintiff was financially able and willing to complete; defendants could not deliver vacant possession of parts of the property (lots 1502-1504) because of continuing occupation and use by an occupant (Mr So); that inability amounted to a repudiatory breach entitling the plaintiff to rescind, recover deposits and costs with interest and to a lien on the properties; plaintiff was therefore relieved from further performance.
11 Dec 1997

CHEUNG YUET KIU v. NEW FUND DEVELOPMENT LTD. AND CHUNG TIM FAT (Third Party)

Citation

CHEUNG YUET KIU v. NEW FUND DEVELOPMENT LTD. AND CHUNG TIM FAT (Third Party)
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4660/1997

Even if the completion date was 3 March, the Defendant was unable to perform its concurrent obligation to convey because it had not itself received title; therefore time ceased to be of the essence, the Plaintiff had a reasonable time to complete, the Defendant's attempt to treat the Plaintiff's non‑tender as repudiation was unfounded, and the Plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment; limiting the summons to alternative relief did not constitute repudiation by the Plaintiff.
16 Dec 1994

MARIANNE TRADING LTD. v. CHEUNG YAN TIN AND OTHERS

Citation

MARIANNE TRADING LTD. v. CHEUNG YAN TIN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4289/1990

The court found the plaintiff proved the quality defect claim as to the 918 cartons and awarded US$29,145, but dismissed the plaintiff's non-delivery claim because under the FOB terms the plaintiff failed to give shipping instructions during the shipment period and therefore could not complain of non-delivery; the defendant's counterclaim failed for lack of mitigation.
26 Mar 1985

SANDY INVESTMENT LIMITED v. THIAM JOO (HK) LIMITED

Citation

SANDY INVESTMENT LIMITED v. THIAM JOO (HK) LIMITED
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5338/1984

Paragraphs 1 and 3 of the Settlement Agreement unambiguously create concurrent and strict obligations: the 2nd defendant "shall pay" US$300,000 and the 1st defendant "shall pay" the instalments on fixed dates; the words "shall cause" impose an obligation on the 2nd and 3rd defendants to ensure payment by the 1st defendant. No condition precedent or secondary-only liability for the 1st defendant is to be implied; consequently the Masters' grants of unconditional leave to defend were wrong and are set aside.

Hong Kong Case Law

SHANDONG HONGRI ACRON CHEMICAL JOINT STOCK CO LTD v. PETROCHINA INTERNATIONAL (HONG KONG) CORPORATION LTD

SHANDONG HONGRI ACRON CHEMICAL JOINT STOCK CO LTD v. PETROCHINA INTERNATIONAL (HONG KONG) CORPORATION LTD

TEAM LEADER DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. TANG PAK CHUNG AND OTHERS

CHEUNG YUET KIU v. NEW FUND DEVELOPMENT LTD. AND CHUNG TIM FAT (Third Party)

MARIANNE TRADING LTD. v. CHEUNG YAN TIN AND OTHERS

SANDY INVESTMENT LIMITED v. THIAM JOO (HK) LIMITED