Read the full judgment text of HCCT 2/2011 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 7 April 2014 before Deputy High Court Judge Burrell.
Construction contract – Quantum determination – Plaintiff subcontractor claiming payment for works and variations – Disputed methodology on measurement and valuation – Use of 2003 final account as basis – Expert evidence conflicted – Court’s approach to disputed items: acceptance of evidence, compromise or splitting difference – Key disputed categories: earthworks, drainage, specific project sites, variation orders by engineer (MCAL) and defendant – Court assessed individual items, accepted some claims fully, partially allowed others, some disallowed – Defendant’s counterclaim dismissed – Judgment for plaintiff for $1,182,933 plus interest – Costs orders reflecting split liability and quantum trials with specified apportions – Case highlights challenges in quantum assessment where expert opinions conflict and evidential deficiencies on records exist.
Outcome: Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,182,933 plus interest at prime rate plus 1% from 28 June 2004; defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Cites 1 case