Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Contra charges

Legal area

Court

13 Sept 2022

CHINNEY SHUN CHEONG BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LTD (formerly known as CHINNEY E & M (MAINTENANCE) LTD) v. JIM CHI WING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2711
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA824/2020

The Master accepted the plaintiff's uncontested evidence, found the defendants repudiated the two sub-contracts, and that the plaintiff validly incurred and proved interim and advance/direct payments, rectification costs and contra charges; damages were properly assessed by difference in value plus actual rectification and contra charges, with interest from 29 September 2020 and costs awarded.
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.
31 Aug 2021

JOHNSON CONTROLS HONG KONG LTD v. WANGLE ENGINEERING LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2560
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2239/2016

The court accepted contemporaneous interim payment certifications and payments as establishing that the defendant had completed all work within the contract by 3 September 2015; plaintiff failed to prove the late, unpleaded assertions (all-inclusive contract, provisional certification, common understanding re double-handling) and causal links to Gammon contra charges or Link-Foong rectification costs; conversely, contemporaneous documents and communications established that much extra work was instructed as variations and defendant was entitled to the VOs sums and materials reimbursement, les…
26 Jul 2021

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

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2184
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT36/2018

The Contract incorporated the drawings and technical specifications relevant to the Plaintiff's subcontract works but did not incorporate the main contract's or MC's full General or Special Conditions; the Contract is a remeasurement contract based on flat area so unit rates in the schedules govern valuation of variations (not weight-based measurement); many of the Plaintiff's variation claims fail for liability or for lack of substantiation; most contra charges claimed by the Defendant fail for lack of sufficient evidence though specified discrete amounts were allowed where supported by evid…
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.
17 Aug 2007

WONG CHUK KIN t/a KIN KEE ALUMINIUM CO v. MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING LTD

Citation

WONG CHUK KIN t/a KIN KEE ALUMINIUM CO v. MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA876/2004

On construction of the contract documents the monthly progress certifications were provisional and subject to final assessment (within the contractually envisaged finalisation period); estoppel was not established; applying the burden of proof and contemporaneous documentation the court made specific quantum adjustments and awarded the Plaintiff a net judgment after set‑offs and payments, and dismissed the Defendant's contra charge for gondola hire as not arising from the subcontractor's obligation.
6 Mar 2007

SUN PAK SHING AND ANOTHER v. ACTION DESIGN CO LTD

Citation

SUN PAK SHING AND ANOTHER v. ACTION DESIGN CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT74/2004

The court dismissed the defendant's liquidated damages counterclaim for lack of evidence. The plaintiffs' variation claims were found largely proven and valued (totaling $1,283,332) and agreed shortfalls on contract payments ($7,542,203) were accepted. Most contra charges and rectification counterclaims failed because either the contractual clause relied upon (clause 11) did not reflect the parties' intention or procedures were not complied with, or there was no adequate evidentiary basis. Accordingly judgment was entered for the plaintiffs for the net sum of $6,277,820 with interest, and the…
13 Dec 2006

SUNLEY ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO LTD v. NGO KEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

SUNLEY ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO LTD v. NGO KEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT49/2002

The sub-contract incorporated the bills of quantities so Sunley was entitled to recover for variations for works omitted or understated where those works were necessary to complete the contracted scope; Sunley was entitled to the quantified variations (subject to agreed deductions for proven contra-charges) and Ngo Kee failed to prove that Sunley caused delay to the main contract or resulting loss, accordingly Ngo Kee's major delay counterclaim failed and judgment was entered for Sunley in the net sum of HK$6,843,309 with interest at prime plus 1% from 21 June 2001; PNAP 227 is recommendatory…
7 Apr 2006

GLOBAL BRIGHT ENGINEERING LTD. v. CWF PILING & CIVIL ENGINEERING CO. LTD.

Citation

GLOBAL BRIGHT ENGINEERING LTD. v. CWF PILING & CIVIL ENGINEERING CO. LTD.
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ930/2004

The Court accepted the unchallenged expert valuation of the work (HK$3,245,213.57), found the Plaintiff liable for defective mini‑pile works which caused delay entitling the Defendant to 14 days liquidated damages (HK$280,000) and to quantified remedial and contra charges as assessed by the expert, disallowed certain prolongation/head‑office overhead claims, and therefore entered judgment for the Defendant on its counterclaim for HK$218,911.46 together with interest and costs.
9 Nov 2005

ONWAY ENGINEERING LTD v. CHINNEY CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

ONWAY ENGINEERING LTD v. CHINNEY CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT10/2002

Court found a licence borrowing agreement existed between Chinney and Shun Wing, that Ken Ng knew of it when he submitted the tender, and that the contracting relationship was Onway as sub-subcontractor to Shun Wing (the principal subcontractor) not Chinney; accordingly Onway's claims against Chinney were dismissed and Chinney held not liable.