GIAN ANDREA PESCI AND ANOTHER v. PETER MIU AND ANOTHER

GIAN ANDREA PESCI AND ANOTHER v. PETER MIU AND ANOTHER

The appeal was dismissed because the matters contended to be uncertain arose from the wording of the Memorandum of Agreement and required construction and evidence at trial rather than further and better particulars; the plaintiffs had pleaded the transfer and the claimed purchase consideration sufficiently and the loss was pleaded as US$200,000 so particulars were unnecessary.

Citation
GIAN ANDREA PESCI AND ANOTHER v. PETER MIU AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: GIAN ANDREA PESCI (also known as JOHN PERCI); 2nd Plaintiff: LEATHER TREND LIMITED; 1st Defendant: PETER MIU; 2nd Defendant: FOCUS MATE COMPANY LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 October 2007
Case Number
HCA2075/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Contractual Breach / Particulars / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Further and Better Particulars, Construction of Agreement, Authority of Signatory, Pleadings in the Alternative, Damages, Costs
Source Language
EN
Contract Civil Procedure Commercial Law Further and Better Particulars Construction of Agreement Authority of Signatory Pleadings in the Alternative Damages +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GIAN ANDREA PESCI (also known as JOHN PERCI)

1st Plaintiff

LEATHER TREND LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

PETER MIU

1st Defendant

FOCUS MATE COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Contractual Breach / Particulars / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs must provide further and better particulars to identify the contractual parties and the obligations under the Memorandum of Agreement
  2. 2 Whether questions about what was transferred and who was obliged to pay are matters for particulars or for trial construction of the agreement
  3. 3 Whether particulars of the invoice and of loss and damage were necessary given the pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the matters contended to be uncertain arose from the wording of the Memorandum of Agreement and required construction and evidence at trial rather than further and better particulars; the plaintiffs had pleaded the transfer and the claimed purchase consideration sufficiently and the loss was pleaded as US$200,000 so particulars were unnecessary.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • This appeal is dismissed.
  • Costs of this appeal to be paid by the defendants to the plaintiffs in any event.