Read the full judgment text of HCCT 2/2023 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 28 November 2025 before Deputy High Court Judge Gary CC Lam.
Construction law — Quantum meruit claim — Contract interpretation — Penalty clauses — Enforcement of penalties for safety breaches — Contractual counterclaims — Trade practices in subcontracting — Liability for rectification works — The plaintiff Wing Lok, a subcontractor, claimed additional payment for demolition works on a quantum meruit basis but failed to prove the appropriate rates with expert evidence, and the court rejected its claim as to Item 2 in the Joint Scott Schedule. The defendant Techoy’s penalties imposed for non-compliance with site safety codes (Items 3 and 10) were held enforceable following the Court of Appeal test from Law Ting Pong Secondary School v Chen Wai Wah, finding legitimate interests proportional to the fines imposed. Regarding rectification costs (Items 4 and 11), the court held Wing Lok liable because alleged trade practice requiring prior notification and consent was unproven and not a legal prerequisite; liability for rectification of defective work rests with the subcontractor. The net result is an order for Wing Lok to pay Techoy a net sum after deductions related to the counterclaims, plus interest and costs. This decision clarifies burden of proof on quantum meruit claims, reiterates principles on enforceability of penalty clauses in contract, and confirms commercial sense against unproven trade practices restricting reimbursement for rectification work.
Legal issues: Quantum meruit claim rate for additional work Item 2 · Enforceability of penalty/fine clauses under Items 3 and 10 · Liability for rectification costs and necessity of consent under Items 4 and 11
Outcome: Wing Lok ordered to pay Techoy HK$377,005.58 plus interest and costs.
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 2 cases