13 Jan 2015
DAWN JADE LTD AND ANOTHER v. HIMANSHU GIRDHAR DUA
- Citation
- DAWN JADE LTD AND ANOTHER v. HIMANSHU GIRDHAR DUA
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACV4/2014
The appeal is dismissed because the defendant failed to demonstrate a meritorious defence with a real prospect of success: the agreements contained contingent conditions which, by clause 3.4(i), mandated automatic termination and refund of deposits when conditions were not satisfied by the Conditions Fulfillment Date; there was no clear, unequivocal shared representation or estoppel, no established waiver/affirmation, and no proven repudiatory breach or other breaches that would entitle forfeiture of deposits or defeat the plaintiffs' claim for refund.