Read the full judgment text of HCCT 52/2014 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 13 March 2017 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Construction Contract — Payment Dispute — Incorporation and Interpretation of Remeasurement Clause — Contractual Rates and Quantum Meruit — Expert Determination — Implied Terms — Adverse Inference. Plaintiff Chan Chi Lam subcontracted water mains works from JV under main contract with WSD. Disputes arose on payment for work orders lacking agreed rates and valuation basis. The Court held the Remeasurement Clause was incorporated into all subcontract work orders, requiring application of re-measurements certified by WSD ‘back-to-back’. The interpretation excluded a limited meaning to only measurement method, affirming it governed actual quantities. For work orders without agreed rates, the Court accepted the joint Expert’s standardized rate schedule and rejected unpleaded rate assertions by Plaintiff. Valuations for disputed items were accepted or disallowed based on evidence. The Court rejected the Plaintiff’s claim of JV’s breach of an implied term to submit quantities for WSD assessment due to lack of particulars and evidence. No adverse inference was drawn against the JV for failure to call a witness whose evidence related to unpursued claims. Parties were ordered to submit a draft order reflecting the judgment and to file submissions on costs within specified timelines.
Legal issues: Incorporation of the Remeasurement Clause · Interpretation of the Remeasurement Clause · Rate for assessing payment under work orders without agreed rates · Valuation of specific disputed items · Existence and breach of implied term that JV submit Chan’s claimed quantities to WSD · Adverse inference for failure to call Mr Wong as witness
Outcome: The court found the Remeasurement Clause incorporated and interpreted it to include application of Main Contract re-measurements; accepted the Expert’s valuation and compilation of applicable rates for work without agreed rates; allowed some contra charges claimed by the JV and disallowed others; rejected implied term breach; declined adverse inference.
Cited by 4 cases · Cites 1 case