Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Notice to complete

Legal area

Court

20 Mar 2012

CIRCLE ANGLE LTD v. ORCHARD ENTERPRISE (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

CIRCLE ANGLE LTD v. ORCHARD ENTERPRISE (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1252/2011

Leave to appeal was granted only in respect of the specific issue whether, given the consideration of a draft cancellation agreement and the withholding of completion steps, OEL was entitled to treat CAL as in breach without notice to complete; leave was refused for the other proposed grounds; costs of the leave application ordered in the cause of the appeal with certificate for counsel.
26 Feb 2010

ELSUN LTD v. CHIN MARGARET

Citation

ELSUN LTD v. CHIN MARGARET
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV314/2008

Defendant failed to demonstrate any triable issue: plaintiff validly raised requisitions and served a notice to complete, was ready and willing to complete, defendant did not validly terminate under clause 18 or exercise any right of rescission before completion, oral assurances were excluded by the written agreement; accordingly summary judgment ordering specific performance was properly granted and the appeal was dismissed.
11 Mar 2005

TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. YIU SUN HUNG

Citation

TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. YIU SUN HUNG
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ569/2003

The application for leave and extension of time is dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success on the appeal: the implied term is unnecessary or imprecise and therefore not arguable except for alternative formulations; the prevention principle cannot be shown arguable as extending beyond a contractual wrong; the challenge to the notice to complete failed; consequently there is no basis to extend time or grant leave.
17 Dec 2004

TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. YIU SUN HUNG

Citation

TIN SHUI WAI DEVELOPMENT LTD v. YIU SUN HUNG
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ569/2003

The court struck out the defence and counterclaim because the alleged implied term could not be implied (it was unnecessary, imprecise and could not be clearly formulated), the prevention principle could not be invoked in absence of an alleged breach of a contractual obligation owed to the defendant, alleged misrepresentations as pleaded did not disclose an actionable cause, and the notice to complete was valid because the consent to assign operated to place the vendor in a position to assign; defendant also failed to act within a reasonable time.
11 Jan 2001

TEAM MASTER LTD. v. TUNG FONG HUNG MEDICINE CO. LTD.

Citation

TEAM MASTER LTD. v. TUNG FONG HUNG MEDICINE CO. LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV245/2000

The Court held that the tenant's 9 July letter constituted an open offer capable of acceptance which the landlord accepted on 11 July, producing a concluded agreement as to the terms of the formal tenancy; time was made of the essence and the notice to execute by the stipulated deadline was reasonable; the tenant's failure to execute by the deadline and its conditioned cheques and equivocal correspondence amounted to a repudiation of the provisional agreement, entitling the landlord to relief and assessment of damages.
21 Dec 2000

KAR HO DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. v. AXIS INVESTMENT LTD.

Citation

KAR HO DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. v. AXIS INVESTMENT LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV218/2000

The appeal was allowed. The court held that the defendant could not have validly rescinded the agreement on 9 July 1998 merely by failing to complete when called upon because that silence/failure was equivocal in the circumstances (including Director of Lands consent and express notice to complete) and did not unequivocally convey acceptance of a repudiatory breach. Consequently paragraphs 12,13,14,15,16,17 and 20 of the Defence and the whole Counterclaim were struck out. The question whether the PTT forms part of the Buildings remains arguable and was not struck out.
2 Dec 1999

EUROPTEX GARMENT LTD. v. MAXWEAR LTD.

Citation

EUROPTEX GARMENT LTD. v. MAXWEAR LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA22374/1998

The court allowed the appeal, holding the plaintiff demonstrated a meritorious defence that the notice to complete may have been defective because it did not strictly notify the vendor was in a position to validly assign; that potential defence justified setting aside the interlocutory default judgment and the Master's orders; and the O.14A order vacating the lis pendens registration was inappropriate to determine at that stage and therefore set aside.
4 Jun 1993

NICE FORTUNE DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. STABLE NETWORK LTD.

Citation

NICE FORTUNE DEVELOPMENT LTD. v. STABLE NETWORK LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV34/1993

The Mareva injunction did not bar completion because the parties had arranged for preservation of specified funds from the purchase money to protect the creditors; there was no basis to imply a contractual requirement that the vendor give separate notice of tenant vacation where the purchaser could have inspected and the vendor's notice to complete necessarily asserted readiness to deliver vacant possession; accordingly the vendor validly rescinded and forfeited the deposit and obtained judgment on its counterclaim.
7 Jun 1985

ELDO TRADING COMPANY LIMITED v. THOROGOOD ESTATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER

Citation

ELDO TRADING COMPANY LIMITED v. THOROGOOD ESTATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA11995/1983

The written sale agreements were complied with as executed; no actionable misrepresentation or material breach entitled the plaintiff to rescind; the court found a collateral promise to allow management/naming but that promise was collateral, not a contractual condition preventing the vendor from serving a valid notice to complete; plaintiff's pleadings did not permit an estoppel defence; consequently defendants' rescission and counterclaim succeeded and judgment was entered for the 1st defendant for HK$137,674,084.
7 Jun 1985

ELDO TRADING COMPANY LIMITED v. THOROGOOD ESTATES LIMITED

Citation

ELDO TRADING COMPANY LIMITED v. THOROGOOD ESTATES LIMITED
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2009/1982

The written sale agreements were complied with by the vendor; alleged oral representations did not give grounds to rescind because either they were not untrue in a material respect, were excluded by the integration clause or were collateral only; the management/naming promise was collateral and, as pleaded, did not amount to a condition precedent or to a misrepresentation entitling rescission; estoppel was not available on the existing pleadings; consequently the plaintiff's claims fail and the vendor's rescission and counterclaim for loss on resale stands.