Read the full judgment text of HCCT000001/1998 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 31 March 1998 before The Hon Mr Justice Findlay, in Chambers.
Contract law — Construction of lump sum building contract incorporating quotation — Whether lump sum limited to maximum quantities or additional work can be claimed without authorized variations — Application for summary judgment. The plaintiff claimed balance payment for additional work under a contract incorporating a quotation specifying a lump sum for maximum quantities and unit prices for excess quantities. The defendant denied entitlement to additional payment on the basis that any extra work must be authorized variations and disputed the plaintiff's interpretation of the contract terms. The court found the contract was comprehensive and intended to preclude claims for work beyond lump sum without variations. The defendant's arguments about scope of works and authorization of variations were arguable and not insubstantial. Summary judgment was refused and unconditional leave to defend was granted. Costs were ordered in the cause.
Legal issues: Whether the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment
Outcome: The defendant was granted unconditional leave to defend; summary judgment was refused.