Read the full judgment text of HCCT85/2002 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 24 January 2003 before Hon Burrell J in Chambers.
Construction law — Subcontractor payment disputes — Summary judgment — Whether letter of 13 July 1999 constituted binding agreement for variation work payment — Court held letter described an interim agreement and did not conclusively establish final sum payable; conditional leave to defend granted. Retention monies of $1.777 million supported by payment summary signed by defendant’s project manager, indicating acceptance; payment into court required before defending. Counterclaims raised by defendant were unparticularized and late but not hopeless; leave to defend allowed on these grounds. Defendant granted unconditional leave to defend variation claims but conditional leave on retention claim. Defendant ordered to pay retention monies into court within 21 days, failing which judgment entered for plaintiff. Costs to be in the cause.
Legal issues: Whether the $3.176 million sum was agreed as a final binding amount · Whether the $1.777 million retention money was undisputed and payable · Whether the $0.662 million variation work sum is subject to the same considerations as the $3.176 million sum
Outcome: Defendant granted unconditional leave to defend $3.176 million and $0.662 million variation work claims; conditional leave to defend the $1.777 million retention money claim subject to payment into court within 21 days; failure to pay results in judgment for plaintiff; costs in the cause.