Union Eagle Ltd v Golden Achievement Ltd [1997] UKPC 5 is a contract law case concerned with the right to terminate performance of a contract. The case was taken up and resolved by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on referral from the Court of Appeal of Hong Kong.
Union Eagle paid 10% of the HK$4.2m price for a Hong Kong flat as a deposit. Time was said to be "of the essence". Completion was meant to be 5pm 30 September 1991, and clause 12 said failure to complete meant the deposit was forfeit and the agreement rescinded. They were 10 minutes late. Union Eagle sued for specific performance, arguing relying on such a legal right was unconscionable.
Lord Hoffmann, delivering judgment, advised that certainty was needed in the business world, particularly in a volatile market. Accordingly, the contract's terms should be strictly enforced, and Union Eagle lost its deposit.