Read the full judgment text of HCCT 33/2007 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 3 August 2015 before Hon L Chan J in Chambers.
Construction and arbitration — contractual dispute — application to strike out claim for inordinate delay and abuse of process — court finds delay not excusable but not amounting to abuse given defendant's passivity and lack of demonstrated prejudice — allegations regarding insufficient particulars and discovery addressed as procedural matters — pleading irregularity — plaintiff sought to include oral agreement and alternative claims under Supply of Services (Implied Terms) Ordinance and quantum meruit in reply instead of statement of claim — court holds these are foundational to claim and must be pleaded properly in statement of claim — plaintiff granted leave to file reply excluding disputed paragraphs — costs awarded on a split basis reflecting hearing focus — case management adjourned for further directions.
Legal issues: Delay and abuse of process · Appropriateness of pleading oral agreement and alternative claims in reply
Outcome: Strike out summons dismissed; plaintiff's summons to file reply allowed subject to deletion of paragraphs on oral agreement and alternative claims; case management summons adjourned.
Cites 1 case