Read the full judgment text of HCCT 2/2023 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 29 July 2025 before Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers.
Construction contract dispute concerning unpaid sums under a demolition Sub-Contract with an agreed lump sum. Plaintiff sought late amendments to the Statement of Claim shortly before the pre-trial review and trial to increase the claim from about $1 million balance to nearly $5.9 million by asserting new agreed sums for Additional Works. Defendant opposed amendments on grounds of delay, lack of particulars, and that the amendments were bound to fail. The Court emphasized the requirement under Order 25 rule 1A RHC for readiness at the PTR and the need to avoid prejudice from late amendments. The Plaintiff failed to justify delay, provide proper particulars, and the proposed new claims contradicted Plaintiff's own witness evidence showing disputes over the sums claimed. The amendments would cause real prejudice by disrupting preparation, requiring further particulars, expert evidence, and amendment of Defence. The Court refused leave to amend the Statement of Claim and related pleadings (except a minor consequential amendment) and ordered costs against the Plaintiff with Certificate for Counsel.
Legal issues: Leave to amend Statement of Claim · Effect of proposed amendments on trial timetable and prejudice · Materiality and validity of proposed amendments
Outcome: Leave to amend the Statement of Claim refused; summonses for amendment dismissed with costs to Defendant; only a consequential amendment to Defence to Counterclaim allowed
Cited by 1 case · Cites 4 cases