- Hong Kong—effect of notification of contractual basis of claim (Maeda v Bauer)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Construction analysis: In an appeal against an interim arbitral award on questions of law, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance held that the effect of a notification provision in a sub-contract, which required the sub-contractor to state the contractual basis for its claim, was that the claim could only succeed on that basis. The case is of interest as the notification provision was similar to that found in the FIDIC 2017 contracts. The court also rejected an appeal against the arbitrator’s assessment of the value of a variation.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial