Read the full judgment text of HCCT 60/2006 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 17 January 2019 before Hon G Lam J.
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Injunction — Time limits for compliance — Extension of time — Court’s discretion — Non-compliance with court orders — Late evidence — Expert reports — Dispute over appropriate duration for compliance with orders relating to ground floor external walls and Part Loft. The plaintiff, WING MING GARMENT FACTORY LIMITED, was ordered in 2014 to remove certain alterations and reinstate specified parts of the property. After failure to comply within a court-imposed 295-day period, and dismissal of Wing Ming’s extension applications, the defendant, THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF WING MING INDUSTRIAL CENTRE (IO), applied to set renewed time limits. Wing Ming submitted late evidence proposing a one-year extension, which the court found inadequately justified. Relying on prior expert evidence and submissions, the court fixed compliance periods of 66 days for the external walls and 265 days for the Part Loft. The court emphasised the unacceptability of Wing Ming’s failure to proactively seek extensions and the need to enforce timely compliance with injunctions. Orders were made accordingly to enforce compliance within the specified timeframes.
Legal issues: Time limits for compliance with injunction orders
Outcome: The court extended the time limits for compliance with the injunction orders according to the IO’s proposed schedule.
Cited by 10 cases