Read the full judgment text of 1996, No. CON 3 / 1996, No. CON 66 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 18 July 1997 before the Hon Mr Justice Findlay.
Construction law — Contract novation — Whether consensual novation between parties to execute plumbing and fire services works — Preliminary issue application for determination of liable party rejected due to factual disputes requiring oral evidence — Discovery order amendments granted due to clerical error — Adjournment of applications for witness statement exchange and trial directions owing to discovery difficulties — Costs orders mainly against Tridant for wasted hearings and discovery problems. The case involves two consolidated actions concerning dispute over subcontracting party and breaches of agreement. The court held that a separate trial on the preliminary issue was inappropriate because of significant factual disputes, including a contested agreement dated 21 October 1994 and multiple witnesses. Amendments to discovery orders were allowed to correct clerical errors. The court urged sensible progression of discovery to enable trial preparation. Outcome includes dismissal of separate trial summons, granting amendment applications, adjournment sine die of other procedural applications, and costs against Tridant for wasted costs linked to discovery difficulties.
Legal issues: Separate trial of preliminary issue on party liability
Outcome: The summons for separate trial of the preliminary issue was dismissed with costs; other summonses for amendments were granted; summonses concerning witness statement exchange and trial directions were adjourned sine die with costs against Tridant.
Cited by 7 cases