← All Authorities
Hong Kong Leading Case professional negligenceconditions warranties innominate

Hong Kong Housing Authority v Hsin Yieh Architects & Associates Ltd

(2002) 5 HKCFAR 191
JurisdictionHong Kong
CourtHK Court of Final Appeal
Year2002
StatusBinding authority

Summary

A professional may owe concurrent duties in contract and in negligence, and a claimant may elect whichever cause of action is more advantageous.

Key Principle

The CFA applied the principles of concurrent liability in contract and tort; a professional may owe concurrent duties in contract and in negligence, and the claimant may choose the more advantageous cause of action.

Area of Law

tort

Related Cases

Bird v DP (A Pseudonym) (2024) 98 ALJR 486

High Court of Australia held a religious organisation vicariously liable for sexual abuse by a priest, recognising a relationship akin to employment sufficient to ground vicarious liability.

Bryant v Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd (2023) 278 CLR 99

High Court of Australia held that the peak indebtedness rule does not apply when assessing unfair preferences under s 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

Kozarov v Victoria (2022) 275 CLR 115

An employer owes a duty to take reasonable steps to protect an employee from psychiatric injury caused by vicarious trauma, and may breach that duty by failing to act on obvious warning signs.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Hong Kong Housing Authority v Hsin Yieh Architects & Associates Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Hong Kong Housing Authority v ...