Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Variation claims

Legal area

Court

17 Mar 2023

BLUE POLES LTD v. BORD INDUSTRIES HK LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 759
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2002/2022

Permanent injunction granted because the statutory demand related to variation claims that were bona fide disputed on substantial grounds and, in respect of several items, disputes existed under the contract's dispute resolution clause and necessary certifications had not been issued such that the debts were not liquidated; there was no evidential basis that the Applicant interfered with certification, so presentation of a winding up petition would be an abuse of process.
17 Feb 2023

SZE FUNG ENGINEERING LTD v. TREVI CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 419
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT51/2019

Item 18 of the Quotation was unambiguous and established a back-to-back/pay-when-paid term: SF's entitlement to payment was conditional on Trevi receiving payment from Leighton/CLP and Trevi would release payment to SF within three days of receipt. Clause 18 of the Subcontract was not incorporated by reference. Consequently SF is not entitled to payment for works, variations or other claims unless Leighton certified and paid those amounts to Trevi; most of SF's claims were therefore dismissed except agreed items and amounts allowed by the court.
2 Sept 2021

MINMETALS CONDO (HONG KONG) ENGINEERING CO LTD v. COLMAT CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING CO LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2591
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT37/2018

The Court corrected manifest numerical errors in the judgment to reflect the expert's figures under Order 20 rule 11; accepted the Defendant's sanctioned offer as justifying enhanced interest and indemnity costs after 13 November 2020; ordered Plaintiff to pay 50% of Defendant's costs up to 13 November 2020 and indemnity costs thereafter with interest on those costs at half the enhanced rate; directed a draft judgment order to be filed incorporating undisputed Scott Schedule sums.
26 Jul 2021

MINMETALS CONDO (HONG KONG) ENGINEERING CO LTD v. COLMAT CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING CO LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2184
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT37/2018

Only the contract drawings and the technical specifications in Annexure 2 as relevant to the subcontractor's works were incorporated into the Contract; the Contract was a remeasurement contract based on flat area so measurement by area and the unit rates in the schedules apply; where the plaintiff failed to prove entitlement or substantiate quantum the claims were disallowed; contra charges required clear evidence and were only allowed in limited, substantiated parts.
18 Apr 2019

MAEDA KENSETSU KOGYO KABUSHIKI KAISHA also known as MAEDA CORPORATION AND ANOTHER v. BAUER HONG KONG LTD

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1006
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT5/2018

The application is dismissed: the court found no serious irregularity causing substantial injustice. The Arbitrator’s 30% apportionment on idling was within the scope of the pleaded issues and parties had a reasonable opportunity to address the matter; the reinforcement cage claims were within the pleaded case and not a decision beyond the submission; the alleged omissions on remedial grouting were matters of factual evaluation and reasoning rather than a failure to deal with issues; thus no remit or setting aside was justified.
11 Jun 2014

KIM HUNG CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO. LTD v. STANDARD REFRIGERATION & ENGINEERING CO. LTD

Citation

KIM HUNG CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO. LTD v. STANDARD REFRIGERATION & ENGINEERING CO. LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT37/2012

Leave to appeal on the CCMS Variation Claim is refused because the Arbitrator's finding of breach of SFDSC 10.3 is fact‑sensitive and not shown to be wrong, the dispute over pay‑when‑paid does not alone dispose of liability, the appeal would only affect costs (quantum assessed nil) and therefore would not substantially affect parties' rights under s.23(4), and the jurisdiction to determine costs and interest remains with the Arbitrator.
28 Jun 2013

W M CONSTRUCTION LTD v. GOLDEN CHOICE ENTERPRISES LTD

Citation

W M CONSTRUCTION LTD v. GOLDEN CHOICE ENTERPRISES LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1927/2011

Leave to enter and inspect the unoccupied houses was granted under Order 29 Rule 7A and section 42(2); an independent architect must be appointed by agreement to inspect and provide impartial certification, failing agreement the court will decide who to appoint; costs to be in the cause.
15 Apr 2005

KIN SHING ENGINEERING (HK) CO LTD v. VINSON ENGINEERING LTD

Citation

KIN SHING ENGINEERING (HK) CO LTD v. VINSON ENGINEERING LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT108/2002

The alleged trade custom that payment for variations is due only after Housing Authority QS certification was not proved to be notorious or certain and was inconsistent with the Works Orders' valuation mechanism (General Conditions 3 and 4); therefore no such term was implied, Vinson could not withhold payment pending QS certification, the court accepted Kin Shing's evidence that Quotations 25 and 26 were agreed and assessed reasonable quantum for other variations, disallowed specified items, refused late amendment and adjournment, and entered judgment for the plaintiff for the computed balan…
28 Aug 2002

GETWICK ENGINEERS LTD. v. PILECON ENGINEERING LTD.

Citation

GETWICK ENGINEERS LTD. v. PILECON ENGINEERING LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA558/2002

The court must stay proceedings in respect of matters covered by the arbitration clause where a dispute exists; the interim payment certificates did not constitute clear and unequivocal admissions of liability and quantum and therefore claims based on them (and on variations/additional works) are stayed to arbitration, but the dishonoured cheque for HK$115,000 constituted a clear and unequivocal admission entitling the plaintiff to summary judgment for that amount; costs ordered against plaintiff to pay two-thirds of defendant's costs.
26 Jun 2002

LIU MAN WAI AND ANOTHER v. CHEVALIER (HONG KONG) LTD.

Citation

LIU MAN WAI AND ANOTHER v. CHEVALIER (HONG KONG) LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV152/2002

Clause 4 only provides for arbitration where there has been a failure to agree the adjustment of price consequent upon variations; the plaintiff's claim is based on an allegation that an agreement as to quantum existed and therefore falls outside the arbitration clause so the court correctly refused a stay.