Read the full judgment text of HCCT 14/2015 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 15 September 2016 before Deputy High Court Judge Wilson Chan.
Construction law — Renovation fitting-out contract — Delay and defects — Whether plaintiff responsible for delay — Whether liquidated damages clause constitutes penalty — Whether oral agreement on remedial work existed. Plaintiff engaged to perform renovation for defendant’s restaurant branch. Plaintiff delayed completion from 2 to 12 February 2015, but court found delay caused by other contractors directly engaged by defendant, as plaintiff was not main contractor and had no duty to coordinate others. Liquidated damages clause of 1% per day upheld as genuine pre-estimate of loss applying Dunlop test. An oral agreement between parties on 12 February 2015 accepted by court, where defendant agreed to carry out remedial works at own cost and plaintiff forewent delay compensation. Defendant's counterclaim for liquidated damages and remedial costs dismissed. Judgment awarded to plaintiff for outstanding contract sum plus interest and costs.
Legal issues: Responsibility for the delay · Whether liquidated damages clause is a penalty · Existence of oral agreement on remedial work
Outcome: Judgment for plaintiff for HK$1,686,846.64; defendant’s counterclaim dismissed
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 1 case