BB & R LTD v. CHINAPLUS WINES LTD AND ANOTHER

BB & R LTD v. CHINAPLUS WINES LTD AND ANOTHER

The court concluded that there was no credible defence to the invoiced debt amounts on the material before it but, because of the extent and character of CWL's counterclaims and disputes (particularly over storage and other profit claims), unconditional summary judgment was inappropriate; accordingly the court granted conditional leave to defend subject to payment into court (HK$800,000 in HCA 1889/2012 and HK$1,500,000 in HCA 1332/2013), ordered delivery up of the affected wines to BBRL at BBRL's cost, allowed certain further affidavits, reserved costs and required written submissions on costs.

Citation
BB & R LTD v. CHINAPLUS WINES LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: BB & R LIMITED; 1st Defendant: CHINAPLUS WINES LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: CHINAPLUS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 November 2014
Case Number
HCA1332/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial Dispute / Application for Summary Judgment and Interim Reliefs (o.14 and O.29)
Outcome
Conditional leave to defend granted in both actions subject to payment into court within 21 days; delivery up order for affected wines at plaintiff's cost; certain affidavit applications allowed; costs reserved and directions given for written submissions.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Interim Payment, Equitable Set Off, Delivery of Goods, Storage Contracts, Conversion, Indemnity, Preservation Orders
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Commercial Law Civil Procedure Sale of Goods Equitable Remedies Restitution Property (bailment/conversion) Summary Judgment +7 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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BB & R LIMITED

Plaintiff

CHINAPLUS WINES LIMITED

1st Defendant

CHINAPLUS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial Dispute / Application for Summary Judgment and Interim Reliefs (o.14 and O.29)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether invoices for cost of goods are payable on expiry of agreed credit period irrespective of physical delivery
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment should be entered or leave to defend granted
  3. 3 Whether interim payment is appropriate under O.29

Ratio Decidendi

The court concluded that there was no credible defence to the invoiced debt amounts on the material before it but, because of the extent and character of CWL's counterclaims and disputes (particularly over storage and other profit claims), unconditional summary judgment was inappropriate; accordingly the court granted conditional leave to defend subject to payment into court (HK$800,000 in HCA 1889/2012 and HK$1,500,000 in HCA 1332/2013), ordered delivery up of the affected wines to BBRL at BBRL's cost, allowed certain further affidavits, reserved costs and required written submissions on costs.

Court Disposition

Conditional leave to defend granted in both actions subject to payment into court within 21 days; delivery up order for affected wines at plaintiff's cost; certain affidavit applications allowed; costs reserved and directions given for written submissions.

Orders

  • Leave granted to CWL to defend HCA 1889/2012 on condition of payment into court of HK$800,000 within 21 days
  • Leave granted to CWL to defend HCA 1332/2013 on condition of payment into court of HK$1,500,000 within 21 days