Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Contribution claims

Legal area

Court

29 Jul 2013

LO PUI FAN AND ANOTHER v. HONGKONG UNITED DOCKYARDS LTD

Citation

LO PUI FAN AND ANOTHER v. HONGKONG UNITED DOCKYARDS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI171/2011

Clause 14.1, properly construed, applies only to disputes arising under or by virtue of the contract concerning the parties' contractual rights and obligations and does not extend to the statutory claims brought by the defendant under s.3 of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Ordinance or s.25(1)(b) of the Employees Compensation Ordinance; accordingly the third party's application to stay the third party proceedings for arbitration is dismissed.
18 Mar 2011

UNITED TECHNOLOGIES FAR EAST LTD v. GST INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

UNITED TECHNOLOGIES FAR EAST LTD v. GST INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1211/2010

The court continued the Mareva injunction because there was sufficient risk and it would be inappropriate at interlocutory stage to discharge an order that would decide a principal trial issue; the court permitted variation to give effect to the Deed of Settlement and allow payment out of escrow because objections based on speculative contribution claims were insufficient to deny the settlement effect and would amount to an improper reverse Mareva; the exercise of discretion favoured preserving security while allowing the agreed settlement distribution.
2 Sept 2005

THE HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY v. HSIN YIEH ARCHITECTS & ASSOCIATES LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

THE HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY v. HSIN YIEH ARCHITECTS & ASSOCIATES LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT39/2001

B+B breached the contract by producing foundations that failed the 1:300 tilt specification at Block 1 and by short piling at Blocks 1 and 2; the Authority acted reasonably in offering rescission and in commissioning and executing remedial, stabilization and reinstatement works on expert advice; B+B's breach was the dominant/effective cause of the losses claimed; damages are awarded to the Authority in the sum HKD 553,749,915.11; B+B's contribution claim against HYA succeeds for 50% of that sum; interest at judgment rate and costs as ordered.
3 Sept 2004

LINFIELD LTD v. TAOHO DESIGN ARCHITECTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

LINFIELD LTD v. TAOHO DESIGN ARCHITECTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT68/2001

Court found MML breached express contractual warranty and duty in selecting and installing Poiseul B5 and is liable for remedial costs and foreseeable loss of rental; GWA as RSE did not breach duties because it reasonably relied on MML's specialised data, acted within statutory supervisory scope, was not required to perform exhaustive pre‑construction testing, and causation of wider economic loss was not attributable to GWA; assignment to Linfield valid; contribution claims dismissed.
25 Nov 2003

LINFIELD LTD v. TAOHO DESIGN ARCHITECTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

LINFIELD LTD v. TAOHO DESIGN ARCHITECTS LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT68/2001

The 4th defendant's application was granted because permitting third party and contribution proceedings under Cap.377 to bring all relevant parties before the same tribunal is consistent with proper case management, minimises the risk of conflicting decisions and there were no special circumstances to refuse the directions sought.

Hong Kong Case Law

LO PUI FAN AND ANOTHER v. HONGKONG UNITED DOCKYARDS LTD

UNITED TECHNOLOGIES FAR EAST LTD v. GST INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT LTD AND OTHERS

THE HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY v. HSIN YIEH ARCHITECTS & ASSOCIATES LTD AND OTHERS

LINFIELD LTD v. TAOHO DESIGN ARCHITECTS LTD AND OTHERS

LINFIELD LTD v. TAOHO DESIGN ARCHITECTS LTD AND OTHERS