Read the full judgment text of HCCT108&109/1999 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 21 March 2000 before Hon Burrell J in Chambers.
Contract Law — Summary Judgment — Order 14, Rule 1 — Equitable Set-off — Contractual Disputes — Defective Goods — Quantum of Damages — Nexus Between Contracts. Plaintiff sought summary judgment on two contracts for supply of ceramic tiles with defendant counterclaiming defects, remedial costs, and liquidated damages. On Contract 109, court held summary judgment inappropriate given genuine triable issues on defects and significant counterclaims raising factual disputes on quantum. On Contract 108, court granted summary judgment as the only defense was an equitable set-off reliant on Contract 109 counterclaim; lacking sufficient nexus, the set-off failed. Court noted defendant’s inadequate evidence on plaintiff’s ability to satisfy judgment. Resulted in unconditional leave to defend Contract 109 and summary judgment without stay on Contract 108. Costs ordered to plaintiff on 108 and costs in the cause on 109.
Legal issues: Entitlement to summary judgment on Contract 109 · Entitlement to summary judgment on Contract 108 with set-off reliance on Contract 109 counterclaim
Outcome: Unconditional leave to defend granted on Contract 109; summary judgment entered without stay on Contract 108.