BSL ELECTRONICS (HK) CO LTD v. CHI LIK ENTERPRISES PLASTIC PRODUCTS LTD AND ANOTHER

BSL ELECTRONICS (HK) CO LTD v. CHI LIK ENTERPRISES PLASTIC PRODUCTS LTD AND ANOTHER

The court found no binding May 2003 agreement due to unreliable and inconsistent evidence from the Plaintiff's witnesses and documentary evidence showing negotiations rather than agreement. The court accepted Mr. Ho's evidence and documentary support that a binding agreement was reached on 26 August 2003 between Mr. Ho and Ms. Leung that commission would be US$0.15 per unit for units accepted/duly delivered, and that this agreement was enforceable under the exception to the rule on past consideration because the transfer had been made at the defendants' request and with an understanding payment would be made. Liability was limited to the 1st Defendant, Chi Lik, and damages were quantified...

Citation
BSL ELECTRONICS (HK) CO LTD v. CHI LIK ENTERPRISES PLASTIC PRODUCTS LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: BSL; 1st Defendant: Chi Lik; 2nd Defendant: Bosonic
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 March 2005
Case Number
DCCJ1464/2004
Procedural Posture
Contract Commission Dispute / Judgment (trial Level)
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant in the sum of US$5,625 (HK$43,762.50); claim against the 2nd Defendant dismissed; interest and costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Commission, Consideration, Agreement Formation, Past Consideration, Variation, Enforceability, Damages, Costs
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Commercial Law Agency Evidence Commission Consideration Agreement Formation Past Consideration +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BSL

Plaintiff

Chi Lik

1st Defendant

Bosonic

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract Commission Dispute / Judgment (trial Level)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding agreement was formed in May 2003 between the Plaintiff and the 1st and/or 2nd Defendant to pay US$0.26 per unit
  2. 2 Whether an agreement was concluded in August 2003 fixing commission at US$0.15 per unit and whether it superseded any earlier agreement
  3. 3 Whether the August agreement (if any) is enforceable notwithstanding past consideration

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no binding May 2003 agreement due to unreliable and inconsistent evidence from the Plaintiff's witnesses and documentary evidence showing negotiations rather than agreement. The court accepted Mr. Ho's evidence and documentary support that a binding agreement was reached on 26 August 2003 between Mr. Ho and Ms. Leung that commission would be US$0.15 per unit for units accepted/duly delivered, and that this agreement was enforceable under the exception to the rule on past consideration because the transfer had been made at the defendants' request and with an understanding payment would be made. Liability was limited to the 1st Defendant, Chi Lik, and damages were quantified...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant in the sum of US$5,625 (HK$43,762.50); claim against the 2nd Defendant dismissed; interest and costs ordered.

Orders

  • 1st Defendant to pay Plaintiff US$5,625 (HK$43,762.50)
  • Interest from day of writ at half judgment rate until judgment and thereafter at full judgment rate until full payment