28 Oct 2022
The court held the present proceedings are barred by res judicata and the Henderson v Henderson principle because the wrongful termination cause of action was finally decided by the Small Claims Tribunal and the plaintiff could and should have advanced all claims in that earlier tribunal; accordingly the appeal is dismissed and costs are awarded to the defendant.
20 Jul 2018
The clauses in the loan documents constituted independent covenants to pay interest at 36% p.a. until full payment (including post-judgment); the Master erred in awarding post-judgment interest at the judgment rate; appeal allowed and contractual rate of 36% p.a. awarded from 3 January 2018 until full payment; costs to plaintiff on indemnity basis summarily assessed at $44,600.
1 Mar 2012
The court found the defendant liable: the Certificate of Compliance under Clause 4(7) did not negate the developer's express and implied contractual obligations (including an implied term that units be fit for luxurious residential use), the extensive post-conveyance works were outstanding contracted works (not mere upgrades) that created a continuing construction site amounting to actionable nuisance and breach of SPA and DMC; plaintiffs awarded damages for loss of rental, rectification costs, interest and indemnity costs.
2 Jul 2010
Clause 2 is an independent covenant that did not merge into the judgment; therefore the contractual rate of 48% p.a. applies to post-judgment interest. Section 49 of the High Court Ordinance does not displace such an independent covenant and there was no evidence to render the clause unconscionable under the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance.
16 Nov 2000
There was more than sufficient primary evidence (credible witness testimony, applicant's role in introducing PW1 to the architect D1, promise of reward and the applicant's own cautioned statement) to permit an irresistible inference that the applicant was a party to the conspiracy; the conviction was therefore safe and the application to appeal was dismissed.