ANGSTREM ELECTRONICS LTD v. KEYLINK INDUSTRIAL LTD

ANGSTREM ELECTRONICS LTD v. KEYLINK INDUSTRIAL LTD

The alleged promises and Representation were not believable and in any event did not disclose any arguable legal defence: the 1st Promise was irrelevant and involved a deceased non‑party; the 2nd Promise lacked consideration and could not defeat the claim; the Representation was too wide, vague and indefinite and commercially implausible and, if made, any cause of action vested in Mr Cheng and against Miss Wong not KIL. No triable issues were disclosed; summary judgment was therefore entered for the plaintiff.

Citation
ANGSTREM ELECTRONICS LTD v. KEYLINK INDUSTRIAL LTD
Parties
Plaintiff: Angstrem Electronics Limited; Defendant: Keylink Industrial Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 January 2008
Case Number
DCCJ2830/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract and Debt (sale of Goods; Dishonoured Cheques) / Summary Judgment Application (district Court)
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Sale of Goods, Dishonoured Cheques, Misrepresentation, Consideration, Privity of Contract, Commercial Credibility
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Civil Procedure Commercial Law Company Law Tort Misrepresentation Summary Judgment Sale of Goods Dishonoured Cheques +4 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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angstrem Electronics Limited

Plaintiff

Keylink Industrial Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract and Debt (sale of Goods; Dishonoured Cheques) / Summary Judgment Application (district Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's factual account is believable
  2. 2 Whether the alleged 1st Promise, 2nd Promise or Representation disclose an arguable defence in law
  3. 3 Whether promises made by a non‑party or promises lacking consideration can defeat a claim for price of goods and dishonoured cheques

Ratio Decidendi

The alleged promises and Representation were not believable and in any event did not disclose any arguable legal defence: the 1st Promise was irrelevant and involved a deceased non‑party; the 2nd Promise lacked consideration and could not defeat the claim; the Representation was too wide, vague and indefinite and commercially implausible and, if made, any cause of action vested in Mr Cheng and against Miss Wong not KIL. No triable issues were disclosed; summary judgment was therefore entered for the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for Plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment for the Plaintiff in terms of the summons issued on 7 September 2007 for the sums claimed
  • Payment of HK$423,908.65 (aggregate of invoices and dishonoured cheques) plus interest as claimed