Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Dayworks

  • 7 Feb 2014

    CHAN SHUN KEI t/a CHAN SHUN KEI CONSTRUCTION WORKS v. HONG KONG CONSTRUCTION (HONG KONG) LTD

    Citation
    CHAN SHUN KEI t/a CHAN SHUN KEI CONSTRUCTION WORKS v. HONG KONG CONSTRUCTION (HONG KONG) LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCT2/2011

    An oral contract was found to exist from June/July 2001 incorporating the terms of SC/041 (including obligations to proceed with due diligence and to pay wages) with the 3.95% management fee deduction forming part of the arrangement; no broad February 2002 daywork agreement was proved (only specific daywork orders were paid), a location‑specific March 2002 WA1 daywork agreement was proved, the Blue & Yellow drawings were excluded as unreliable in favour of the contemporaneous 2003 final account, termination was substantively justified for repudiatory breaches (insufficient resources and unpai…

  • 10 Apr 1995

    UBC (CONSTRUCTION) LIMITED v. SUNG FOO KEE, LIMITED

    Citation
    UBC (CONSTRUCTION) LIMITED v. SUNG FOO KEE, LIMITED
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCT10/1991

    The court found the defendant in breach of contract for underpaying variations and dayworks (aggregate shortfall found approximately HK$900,000 as at 31 December 1990), that this underpayment was the dominant cause of the plaintiff declining the Woon Lee subcontract, and that loss from that lost contract was reasonably foreseeable given the contract terms and the defendant's knowledge; accordingly the plaintiff was entitled to special damages calculated as projected profit on the lost Woon Lee contract (assessed at 9% of HK$11.131m = HK$1,001,790).

  • 19 Jul 1993

    UBC (Construction) Limited v. Sung Foo Kee Limited

    Citation
    UBC (Construction) Limited v. Sung Foo Kee Limited
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCT11/1991

    The court found SFK's late amendment and denial of the clear meaning of UBC daywork certificates was oppressive and an affront to the court, and that these specific items of expense were caused unnecessarily by SFK; therefore those specified items are to be taxed on an indemnity basis while all other costs (pre-trial and trial generally) will be taxed on the usual party-and-party basis; counterclaim costs are not ordered against SFK and post-judgment hearings costs are borne by SFK on the usual basis.

  • 1 Jun 1993

    UBC (CONSTRUCTION) LTD v. SUNG FOO KEE LTD

    Citation
    UBC (CONSTRUCTION) LTD v. SUNG FOO KEE LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCT11/1991

    On the facts the court found that (a) oral quotations for the majority of disputed VOs were requested, accepted (expressly or by conduct) and performed and therefore binding despite GCC 18 because SFK waived strict formalities and are estopped from relying on them; (b) dayworks were instructed by SFK and certified contemporaneously and are recoverable under GCC 7; (c) consideration for extra payments existed in commercial benefit to SFK (Williams v Roffey); (d) SCC 5 did not automatically bar adjustment or recovery but did not defeat UBC's established claims; (e) the contractual 2.1288% disco…