Matter
Cheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction Co Ltd v Permanent Investment Co Limited (Hong Kong Court of First Instance HCCT 8/2016)
- 1 February 2016Hong Kong
1 February 2016Hong Kong
Ex parte order of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance in HCCT 8/2016 dated 1 February 2016
High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance
- Decision summary
- The court ordered Permanent Investment to withdraw its demand to Shanghai Commercial Bank under the surety bond for payment and prohibited it from receiving payment under the bond.
Supporting details
2 authorities · 3 participantsCheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction Co Ltd
Permanent Investment Co Limited
High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance
- Judge
- Chow J
3 days later · 3 days
- 4 February 2016Hong Kong
4 February 2016Hong Kong
Consent order of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance in HCCT 8/2016 dated 4 February 2016
High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance
- Decision summary
- By consent, the court discharged the ex parte order in exchange for Permanent Investment's undertakings, including that the bank withhold consideration of payment under the bond until final determination of the parties' dispute in arbitration or court. The court stayed further proceedings and reserved costs.
Supporting details
2 participantsCheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction Co Ltd
Permanent Investment Co Limited
High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance
3 years, 2 months and 6 days later · 1161 days
- 10 April 2019Arbitration
10 April 2019Arbitration
Arbitral Award published 10 April 2019
- Decision summary
- The tribunal determined the dispute concerning Permanent Investment's entitlement to make a valid demand under the surety bond and the contract in favour of Cheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction. It declared that Cheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction was entitled to release from the bond as of 31 March 2015.
Supporting details
2 participantsCheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction Co Ltd
Permanent Investment Co Limited
1 year, 5 months and 20 days later · 539 days
- 30 September 2020Hong Kong
30 September 2020Hong Kong
Ruling of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance in the case HCCT 8/2016 dated 30 September 2020
High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance
- Citation
- [2020] HKCFI 2561
- Decision summary
- The court ordered Permanent Investment to pay Cheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction the costs of the action, including the ex parte application, summons, and consent summons, on the usual party-and-party basis with a certificate for counsel. It rejected indemnity costs because the tribunal had found that Permanent Investment acted from a genuine but mistaken belief about its contractual entitlement to call on the bond.
Supporting details
2 authorities · 5 participantsCheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction Co Ltd
- Representative
- Norton Rose Fulbright Hong Kong (For: Cheung Kee Fung Cheung Construction Co Ltd)
Permanent Investment Co Limited
- Representative
- Deacons (For: Permanent Investment Co Limited)
High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance
- Judge
- Mimmie Chan