Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Joint inspection

Legal area

Court

24 Jun 2024

SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. FERGURSON HONG KONG LTD t/a NEW WORLD MILLENNIUM HONG KONG HOTEL

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1018
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2191/2023

Applying section 63A and established authority, the applicant failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or other reason in the interests of justice: the 2nd stay summons was a de facto procedural circumvention of appeal rules and case management decisions attract a high hurdle; the master and judge did not err in law or act plainly irrationally in refusing the stays and in how discovery/joint inspection issues were handled; therefore leave to appeal is refused and costs awarded against the Plaintiff in the sum HK$30,000 on a party and party basis.
27 Mar 2024

SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. FERGURSON HONG KONG LTD t/a NEW WORLD MILLENNIUM HONG KONG HOTEL

Citation

[2024] HKDC 509
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2191/2023

Leave to re-amend the amended statement of claim was granted only for those proposed paragraphs that are relevant to the substantive dispute; proposed amendments consisting of background about prior ex parte applications and judicial communications were disallowed as irrelevant. The inventory referred to in the plaintiff's 18 May 2023 email was prima facie shown to exist and is centrally relevant; accordingly the court ordered mutual discovery and inspection of the plaintiff's detailed inventory (with photos and videos) and the defendant's list of items removed, to be exchanged within 28 days…
9 Jan 2024

SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD 對 FERGURSON HONG KONG LTD t/a NEW WORLD MILLENNIUM HONG KONG HOTEL

Citation

[2024] HKDC 68
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2191/2023

The court dismissed the ex parte injunction and the stay application because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate genuine urgency or a material change of circumstances, had repeatedly abused the ex parte procedure, imposed unreasonable conditions that caused delay despite defendant's offers to relocate/repack under joint inspection, failed to provide an inventory or evidence of value or ability to compensate, and the stay application was procedurally defective under Order 45 r11 and should have been made post‑judgment to the judge who gave the judgment; accordingly both applications were revok…
10 Jan 2006

WONG YICK MING v. PRICERITE STORES LTD

Citation

WONG YICK MING v. PRICERITE STORES LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI224/2005

Photographs taken in a joint, non‑confidential inspection of the accident site using the defendant's representative's camera are relevant and discoverable and are not protected by litigation privilege merely because they were later annexed to an accident report.
20 Oct 1999

BRAIN FUTURE LTD. v. CENTURY CROWN LTD.

Citation

BRAIN FUTURE LTD. v. CENTURY CROWN LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV196/1999

The court held that even accepting the purchaser could raise a late requisition on reasonable grounds, the vendor's answer that no cocklofts existed was a satisfactory answer; the purchaser was bound by the contractual 'as is' clauses which excluded objections to alleged unauthorised structures, the vendor was not obliged to permit a joint inspection, and the purchaser's failure to complete was a fundamental breach entitling the vendor to forfeit the deposits; appeal dismissed.
11 Jun 1999

BRAIN FUTURE LTD. v. CENTURY CROWN LTD.

Citation

BRAIN FUTURE LTD. v. CENTURY CROWN LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP813/1998

The requisition regarding alleged unauthorised works was raised out of time and not within a reasonable period after receipt of title deeds; alternatively the Defendant had sufficiently answered the requisition by obtaining architect/surveyor reports showing no cocklofts; consequently the Plaintiff was not entitled to withhold completion, the Defendant lawfully terminated the Agreement and forfeited the deposit.

Hong Kong Case Law

SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. FERGURSON HONG KONG LTD t/a NEW WORLD MILLENNIUM HONG KONG HOTEL

SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. FERGURSON HONG KONG LTD t/a NEW WORLD MILLENNIUM HONG KONG HOTEL

SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD 對 FERGURSON HONG KONG LTD t/a NEW WORLD MILLENNIUM HONG KONG HOTEL

WONG YICK MING v. PRICERITE STORES LTD

BRAIN FUTURE LTD. v. CENTURY CROWN LTD.

BRAIN FUTURE LTD. v. CENTURY CROWN LTD.