Read the full judgment text of HCCT000015/1993 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 8 April 1998 before The Hon Mr Justice Findlay.
Contract law — Construction contract sub‑contracting — Dispute over payment for works and variations — Counterclaims for demolition and replacement work, and remedying alleged defects — Evidence and pleadings assessed — Allocation of liability for ceiling demolition costs — Reasonableness of claims for variations — Interest and costs awarded. The plaintiff, sub-contractor for AC work at a hotel, claimed unpaid contract balance and variations. The defendant main contractor counterclaimed for costs of ceiling demolition and defect rectification. The court found no basis to hold plaintiff liable for ceiling dismantling costs, concluding the defendant chose to remove the entire ceiling to meet time constraints without plaintiff’s approval or instruction. The variation claim for light recess was allowed at the hotel's quantity surveyor assessed value. The defendant failed to prove breach of contract or sufficiency of evidence for defect remediation claim. Interest was awarded on sums due from specified date; costs awarded in favor of plaintiff. Defendant's counterclaims dismissed.
Outcome: Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $263,270; defendant's counterclaims dismissed.