Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Exemption/limitation clauses

Legal area

Court

25 May 2004

SUNBOND ENGINEERING LTD v. KONWALL CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO LTD

Citation

SUNBOND ENGINEERING LTD v. KONWALL CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT15/2003

Tender clause 3 unambiguously allocated the risk of abandoned piles (including those abandoned due to contractor negligence) to Konwall; the May 2000 incorporation clause did not import the Main Contract's general obligations; Konwall failed to prove Sunbond's negligence or culpable delay on the balance of probabilities; consequently Konwall's defence and counterclaim fail and judgment entered for Sunbond for HK$1,878,852.50 plus interest and costs.
24 Aug 1995

JARDINE FREIGHT SERVICES (HK) LTD v. A CLASS FASHION MANUFACTORY

Citation

JARDINE FREIGHT SERVICES (HK) LTD v. A CLASS FASHION MANUFACTORY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV215/1994

The Court upheld the trial judge's exercise of discretion in refusing the late admission of the witness statement; held that the HAFFA standard trading conditions were incorporated by the written quotations; concluded the exemption clauses applied because on the balance of probabilities the quota visa was lost while outside the plaintiff's actual custody and control (thus exempting liability); held that 'goods' includes documents; held there was no waiver evidenced by the early letter; and refused to disturb the judge's discretionary award of interest given lateness of the contractual point a…
19 Apr 1995

DENSE BILLION LTD. v. WAYON (CHINA AND HONG KONG) TRANSPORTATION & TRADING CO. and LAM SIU HUNG (Third Party)

Citation

DENSE BILLION LTD. v. WAYON (CHINA AND HONG KONG) TRANSPORTATION & TRADING CO. and LAM SIU HUNG (Third Party)
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2107/1993

The court held the theft was not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the driver's conduct to the high degree required to attribute liability for the independent criminal act; the driver, though in breach of employment instructions, was not negligent towards the plaintiff in the requisite sense and, in any event, the exemption clause did not, by its wording, exclude liability for negligence by the carrier or its servants. Therefore the defendant was not liable to the plaintiff and the defendant's indemnity claim against the third party failed.

Hong Kong Case Law

SUNBOND ENGINEERING LTD v. KONWALL CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO LTD

JARDINE FREIGHT SERVICES (HK) LTD v. A CLASS FASHION MANUFACTORY

DENSE BILLION LTD. v. WAYON (CHINA AND HONG KONG) TRANSPORTATION & TRADING CO. and LAM SIU HUNG (Third Party)