Read the full judgment text of HCCT000040B/1998 CT40/1998 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 9 November 1999 before The Hon Mr Justice Findlay.
Contract Law — Building contract dispute — Validity of architect’s appointment — Clause 25 on termination — Suspension of work and reasonable cause — Wrongful repudiation — Damages assessment — Interest — Costs. The plaintiff engaged the defendant as main contractor to build a composite building, but had no valid appointment of the architect under this contract, contrary to practice under a parallel contract with Wing Bo Building Construction. The defendant slowed work due to non-payment, which was a justified suspension. The plaintiff purported to terminate the contract relying on clause 25 by a notice from the architect, but the notice was invalid as the architect was not appointed under this contract and did not specify grounds relied upon. The court held that the plaintiff’s termination was unlawful repudiation of the contract and dismissed its claim. The defendant was entitled to damages based on the architect's assessment plus allowances for additional work and loss of profit at 5%. Interest was granted at prime plus 1% with compound interest on retention money. Costs were awarded to the defendant. Appeal by plaintiff dismissed.
Legal issues: Validity of contract termination under clause 25 · Damages and assessment due to wrongful repudiation
Outcome: Plaintiff's claim dismissed; defendant's counterclaim allowed with damages and interest awarded