Read the full judgment text of HCCT 3/2008 and HCCT 25/2008 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 2 June 2008 before Hon Reyes J.
Construction law — Arbitration — Sub-Contract for lump sum fixed price tender with provisional quantities — Whether lump sum contract price can be adjusted for re-measured provisional quantities in Bill 9.5 — Held yes; Arbitrator’s interpretation consistent with industry practice and contract construction principles. Interest — Whether interest should run from earlier date or be limited for unreasonable delay — Held Arbitrator entitled to limit interest to three years due to delay by UDL. Arbitration costs — Application of Rule 18 of ACP Rules (no account of settlement offers if payment into court possible) — Held parties waived strict application by conduct; Arbitrator entitled to consider Calderbank offer affecting costs. UDL’s appeals dismissed; leave to appeal refused.
Legal issues: Adjustment of lump sum contract price for provisional quantities · Entitlement to interest and period allowed · Application of Rule 18 of Airport Core Programme Arbitration Rules regarding Calderbank offer
Outcome: Leave to appeal refused on all grounds; UDL’s Notices of Motion dismissed.
Cited by 1 case