Read the full judgment text of HCCT 29/2013 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 15 February 2017 before Hon Anthony Chan J.
Construction law — Arbitration — Pre-judgment interest — Costs order — Delivery charges dispute. The plaintiff, Chun Wo Building Construction Limited, sued Metta Resources Limited over claims including variation orders, design input, and payment certificates. The court determined that pre-judgment interest for variation order claims amended on 16 December 2015 runs from that date; no interest is awarded for the design input amount as the claim was a 'guesstimate'; for IPC 28 and 29, interest runs from their due dates despite Metta's entitlement to liquidated damages, due to the breakdown of contractual processes and Metta’s conduct. On costs, considering partial success and trial complexity, Chun Wo is awarded 70% of its costs, taxed if not agreed, with no costs awarded on Metta’s counterclaim. Certificates for four counsel were justified on each side. The court declined to rule on disputed delivery charges post-trial due to lack of pleading and finality of the trial. Parties to be heard further on costs of this hearing. Outcome reflects careful balancing of interests, procedural fairness, and trial realities.
Legal issues: Pre-judgment interest start dates · Appropriate costs order · Dispute on delivery charges for off-site materials
Outcome: Pre-judgment interest awarded as specified; Chun Wo awarded 70% costs; no costs order on Metta’s counterclaim; certificate for four counsel granted; court declines adjudication on delivery charges dispute.
Cites 1 case