BRUNO GATJENS & CO v.SAM C.S. SZE

BRUNO GATJENS & CO v.SAM C.S. SZE

The contract was with the defendant trading as Interocean Seafood (the payment instruction to Interocean Fisheries was only a method of payment and did not substitute parties); the defendant admitted non‑conformity in correspondence, establishing breach; accordingly the plaintiff is entitled to judgment for damages to be assessed under Order 14, r 1(1).

Citation
BRUNO GATJENS & CO v.SAM C.S. SZE
Parties
Plaintiff: Bruno Gatjens & Co; Defendant: Sam C.S. Sze
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 August 1995
Case Number
HCA11137/1994
Procedural Posture
Breach of Contract (summary Judgment Application) / Appeal From Master's Summary Judgment (re‑hearing in Chambers)
Outcome
Judgment entered for plaintiff for damages to be assessed; order nisi for costs in favour of the plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Breach of Contract, Damages Assessment, Letters of Credit, Agency/identity of Contracting Party
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Breach of Contract Damages Assessment Letters of Credit Agency/identity of Contracting Party

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bruno Gatjens & Co

Plaintiff

Sam C.S. Sze

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Breach of Contract (summary Judgment Application) / Appeal From Master's Summary Judgment (re‑hearing in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract was between the plaintiff and the defendant or with Interocean Fisheries Packing Ltd
  2. 2 Whether the defendant breached the contract by supplying non‑conforming goods
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment could be entered at this stage and whether damages must be assessed later

Ratio Decidendi

The contract was with the defendant trading as Interocean Seafood (the payment instruction to Interocean Fisheries was only a method of payment and did not substitute parties); the defendant admitted non‑conformity in correspondence, establishing breach; accordingly the plaintiff is entitled to judgment for damages to be assessed under Order 14, r 1(1).

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for plaintiff for damages to be assessed; order nisi for costs in favour of the plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff for damages to be assessed
  • Costs of the appeal to be paid by the defendant (order nisi)