Read the full judgment text of CACV 424/2002 on BabelCite. This 高等法院上訴法庭 judgment was delivered on 12 November 2003 before Hon Woo JA, Cheung JA.
Contract Law — Pleading — Causation and Loss — Wasted Expenditure — Leave to appeal to Court of Final Appeal — Whether questions raised on pleading causation and wasted expenditure amount to matters of great general or public importance — Court of Appeal refused leave. The plaintiff, representing a syndicate of banks, alleged breach by contractor Molitoko under a Development Agreement causing wasted expenditure after the abandonment of delay damages. The defendant insurer sought leave to appeal the refusal to strike out pleadings for failure to adequately plead causal link between breach and loss. The Court held the matter was fact-sensitive, based on scanty pleaded facts, and principles raised were unsuitable for determination on bare pleadings. The Court relied on Lonrho Plc v Tebbit that complex legal issues in developing fields should be decided at trial on full facts. Questions raised did not arise from the Court of Appeal judgment and were not of great general or public importance. Leave was refused and costs ordered against the defendant.
Legal issues: Whether the questions raised justify leave to appeal on great general or public importance
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused
Cited by 2 cases