Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sub-contract interpretation

Legal area

Court

21 Sept 2017

WIN WIN WAY CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD v. JUDEA CONSTRUCTION CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

WIN WIN WAY CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD v. JUDEA CONSTRUCTION CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT37/2016

The court applied the general rule that a plaintiff discontinuing a claim must pay the defendants' costs, refused to carve out costs of preparing accounts because plaintiff failed to show those costs were not wasted or sufficiently linked to inevitable proceedings, and declined to award indemnity costs because the plaintiff's case was not shown to be so unmeritorious or egregious to justify indemnity; plaintiff granted leave to withdraw stay and discontinue, with costs to the defendants taxed if not agreed, but costs incurred by defendants after 16 August 2017 for trial preparation were disal…
28 Jan 2013

KITAK MACHINERY ENGINEERING CO LTD v. FIGURE WELL LTD

Citation

KITAK MACHINERY ENGINEERING CO LTD v. FIGURE WELL LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ768/2010

The court accepted the plaintiff's evidence as credible and supported by contemporaneous documents (summaries and invoices). Those documents demonstrated that the compromise calculations did not include depot/site office expenses and that the parties, by the terms of the subcontract and their conduct, contemplated depot to include a site office. Therefore the compromise did not discharge the plaintiff's claim for half the depot/site office expenses and the defendant is liable to pay half, being $505,879.64, plus interest and costs.
4 Jul 1994

FUNG CHEUNG v. KWAN LEE CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

Citation

FUNG CHEUNG v. KWAN LEE CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT12/1993

The Court held that the subcontractor was entitled to the agreed fixed percentage of the sums actually received by the main contractor for the relevant items (including the caisson windfall), found as a fact that caissons were excavated from cut-off level (supporting the defendant's factual case but not defeating plaintiff's entitlement to percentage of amounts received), accepted Levett & Bailey's measurements for concrete walls (no deduction for brick substitutions), upheld an oral agreement entitling the plaintiff to fluctuation payments across the subcontracts, determined the arbitration…
23 May 1984

OTIS ELEVATOR CO (HK) LTD v. WIDE PROJECT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

OTIS ELEVATOR CO (HK) LTD v. WIDE PROJECT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA15214/1983

Although the Defendant's explanation for delay was not strong, it was sufficient to place the Defendant in court and the Defendant disclosed an arguable and triable issue: it is arguable that the Contract comprises the ten bound documents and that the Particular Specification (Document 7), construed with the General Specification, imposes an insurance obligation on the Sub-contractor covering goods until two weeks after delivery, which, if established, would defeat the Plaintiff's claim. The default judgment was therefore set aside and the Defendant permitted to defend.

Hong Kong Case Law

WIN WIN WAY CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD v. JUDEA CONSTRUCTION CO LTD AND ANOTHER

KITAK MACHINERY ENGINEERING CO LTD v. FIGURE WELL LTD

FUNG CHEUNG v. KWAN LEE CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

OTIS ELEVATOR CO (HK) LTD v. WIDE PROJECT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION CO LTD