Read the full judgment text of CACV 251/1998 on BabelCite. This 高等法院上訴法庭 judgment was delivered on 2 June 1999 before Hon. Mortimer, V.P., Godfrey & Rogers, JJ.A..
Commercial Arbitration — Construction Contract — Extension of Time — Arbitrator's Jurisdiction — Liquidated Damages — Breach of Contract — Abandonment of Claim — Supplemental Agreement — Appeal from Arbitration Award. The dispute concerned a demolition contract with a fixed completion date under a Supplemental Agreement dated 25 October 1995, providing for $10,000 daily liquidated damages for late completion beyond 16 January 1996. The Appellant claimed extensions of time and prolongation costs, abandoning earlier claims for breach damages. The arbitrator granted extensions of time totaling 61 days and awarded prolongation costs but was held by Findlay J and the Court of Appeal to have acted beyond jurisdiction by granting extensions not authorized in the contract. The Court affirmed that the Supplemental Agreement superseded prior breaches and fixed liquidated damages which were enforceable. The Court further held that the Appellant could not resurrect abandoned breach claims on appeal due to procedural principles against inconsistent claims. The appeal was dismissed with an order nisi for costs in favour of the Respondent. The case underscores the strict contractual basis for extensions and damages in construction arbitration and the limits of arbitral jurisdiction.
Legal issues: Arbitrator's power to grant extension of time · Claimant’s abandonment of breach of contract claim · Effect of Supplemental Agreement on prior contract breaches
Outcome: Appeal dismissed with order nisi as to costs in favour of the Respondent