Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Time of the essence

Legal area

Court

29 Jan 2026

WAN MING SUN v. WONG HOI KWAN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCA 91
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV72/2025

The 2nd defendant's appeal was dismissed for want of locus because the Official Receiver, as trustee in bankruptcy, did not consent to continuation; the Court exercised its discretion to lift the statutory stay for the 1st defendant due to inexcusable delay and lack of merit; on the merits the trial judge was correct that the defendants repudiated the PASP by failing to deliver required MG documents within the 14‑day contractual period, letters of 12 and 26 April 2023 did not amount to waiver or affirmation, time remained of the essence, and therefore the High Court's orders for return of dep…
1 Dec 2023

YEUNG PO CHEONG 對 TEMPO CORPORATION LTD

Citation

[2023] HKLdT 70
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDPD1313/2023

The tribunal found the landlord unequivocally manifested an intention not to deliver possession and thereby repudiated the lease; the tenant's conduct (cancelling the deposit cheque and failing to pay rent) amounted to acceptance of that repudiation; therefore the lease was terminated and unenforceable, the landlord could not recover rent or compel specific performance, and the landlord must pay the tenant's costs to be assessed.
20 Apr 2021

TEAM EIGHT GROUP LTD v. LO YUK YEE

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1010
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1933/2019

Rider (2)(a) obliging the Defendant to produce the latest three years audited financial statements was a condition of the Provisional Agreement, time for its performance was of the essence, the Defendant breached that condition by failing to provide audited accounts by the deadline, the Plaintiff validly accepted the resulting repudiatory breach and is entitled to summary judgment for declarations, return and payment out of the HK$20,000,000 deposit with interest, damages to be assessed and costs to the Plaintiff.
26 Nov 2020

SIT SAU MING v. LEUNG MAY CHUN ALISON ALIANCE (formerly known as SHAM MAY CHUN)

Citation

[2020] HKCA 1037
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP195/2020

The intended appeal has no prospect of success because the Chief Judge properly found that the parties, through their solicitor, agreed to postpone completion to 9 January 2008; Union Eagle does not apply where completion was postponed by agreement and there was therefore no breach; accordingly leave to appeal is refused and the summons dismissed.
15 Jun 2020

CASTLE GLOBAL LTD v. IP TAI HOI PAUL

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1106
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP645/2019

The court held that the Defendant's failure to deliver the 2018 audited accounts and the draft completion management accounts by the contractual deadlines (time being of the essence) constituted breaches entitling the Plaintiff to accept repudiation; clause 4 does not permit the vendor to defeat completion by withholding documents; accordingly the Plaintiff was entitled to return of the deposit and liquidated damages under clause 16(b).
27 Sept 2019

鄺裕成經營大成工程公司 v. 卓賢科務有限公司

Citation

[2019] HKDC 1286
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3804/2013

Court found plaintiff had substantially completed chiller No.3 by 11 May 2012 and the defendant failed to prove an oral deadline made time of the essence; therefore defendant repudiated the contract by evicting plaintiff and plaintiff was entitled to payment and agreed wasted/preparatory sums while defendant's defect counterclaims were largely unproven and only nominal damages were awarded to defendant; judgments entered accordingly.
3 Aug 2018

CHOW NAP MAN v. CHUNG WAI KWONG

Citation

[2018] HKCA 469
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV137/2017

The judge erred in summarily dismissing the originating summons as obviously unsustainable because it was reasonably arguable that the memorandum allowed implication of a term that Chow be given reasonable time to raise capital for completion; accordingly the matter was remitted to the Court of First Instance for rehearing and the defendant's application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was dismissed as not raising questions of great general or public importance; costs were ordered for the respondent and assessed by the court.
17 Feb 2017

LAI TING KWONG v. WUI LOONG SCAFFOLDING WORKS CO LTD

Citation

LAI TING KWONG v. WUI LOONG SCAFFOLDING WORKS CO LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1748/2014

Clause 6 was ambiguous and construed not to make time of payment essential; one-day late payment did not entitle plaintiff to terminate; plaintiff repudiated by ceasing work from 27 Dec 2013 so forfeited retention; plaintiff was nonetheless entitled to the assessed 4th interim payment of $143,487; defendant entitled to recover part of day-worker costs leading to judgment for defendant $22,832; net award payable to plaintiff $120,655 plus interest and costs nisi.
16 Dec 2016

FAN KAI MING v. LAM SUSAN SHUI HING

Citation

FAN KAI MING v. LAM SUSAN SHUI HING
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2037/2015

The Cancellation Agreement constituted a mutually performed accord and satisfaction that extinguished the Provisional Agreement on its formation; no term making time of the essence for the defendant's payment under clause 2 could be implied; the bounced cheque was a breach of the Cancellation Agreement only and did not amount to repudiation or revive the Provisional Agreement; plaintiff's claims for specific performance and damages in lieu were dismissed.
9 Jul 2015

曾氏工程公司 v. 林慧嫻

Citation

曾氏工程公司 v. 林慧嫻
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3596/2011

The judge preferred plaintiff's and corroborating witness evidence over the defendant's, found the parties agreed to the Quotation price of $473,000 and authorized the listed demolition/disposal, concluded time was not made of the essence, found delays were attributable to the defendant's changes (tiles) and not breach by plaintiff, held the defendant was not lawfully entitled to require faxed identity card copies as a precondition for returning tools and had wrongfully retained tools, dismissed the defendant's counterclaim, and awarded the plaintiff damages totaling $122,478.20 plus interest…