CAMERON MICROSYSTEMS LTD. v. BLOOMVILLE TRADING LTD.

CAMERON MICROSYSTEMS LTD. v. BLOOMVILLE TRADING LTD.

The court found the consultant had failed to perform the contractual obligation to link the Polos to the Compaq, that this failure discharged Bloomville from paying the retainer fees for the period in question, and that there was no proven professional negligence or actionable misrepresentation by the consultant; consequently both the claim for fees and the counterclaim failed and were dismissed with no order as to costs.

Citation
CAMERON MICROSYSTEMS LTD. v. BLOOMVILLE TRADING LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action): Cameron Microsystems Limited; Defendant (original Action): Bloomville Trading Limited; Plaintiff (counterclaim): Bloomville Trading Limited; Defendant (counterclaim): Cameron Microsystems Limited; Defendant (counterclaim): Keith Cameron
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 February 1988
Case Number
DCCJ24/1987
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract and Professional Negligence Dispute / Judgment at Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed; counterclaim dismissed; no order as to costs (each party bears its own costs); order nisi on costs to become absolute after 14 days unless varied
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Consultancy Agreement, Condition Precedent, Entitlement to Fees, Time of Payment, Election and Repudiation, Measure of Damages, Costs Allocation
Source Language
EN
Contract Tort Professional Negligence Misrepresentation Costs Breach of Contract Consultancy Agreement Condition Precedent +5 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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cameron Microsystems Limited

Plaintiff (original Action)

Bloomville Trading Limited

Defendant (original Action)

Bloomville Trading Limited

Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Cameron Microsystems Limited

Defendant (counterclaim)

Keith Cameron

Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract and Professional Negligence Dispute / Judgment at Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether consultant was entitled to monthly retainer fees for April, May and June 1986
  2. 2 Whether the consultant was negligent or made actionable misrepresentations in recommending the Compaq/Oracle/Polos configuration
  3. 3 Whether failure to link Polos to the Compaq constituted breach of contract and whether that breach gave rise to damages

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the consultant had failed to perform the contractual obligation to link the Polos to the Compaq, that this failure discharged Bloomville from paying the retainer fees for the period in question, and that there was no proven professional negligence or actionable misrepresentation by the consultant; consequently both the claim for fees and the counterclaim failed and were dismissed with no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; counterclaim dismissed; no order as to costs (each party bears its own costs); order nisi on costs to become absolute after 14 days unless varied

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Counterclaim dismissed