ANTRON EXPRESS LTD 對 ALL BEST ACCESSORIES LTD

ANTRON EXPRESS LTD 對 ALL BEST ACCESSORIES LTD

Leave to appeal refused because the tribunal's decision was a factual finding: the contract terms were incorporated, there was no agreed delivery date, the website statements were at most estimates and not proved to be binding contractual guarantees, the delays were caused by flight punctuality beyond the claimant's control and fell within the exclusion clause, and the defendant produced no persuasive evidence of reliance or that the terms were unconscionable; accordingly no arguable question of law or jurisdiction justified leave.

Citation
ANTRON EXPRESS LTD 對 ALL BEST ACCESSORIES LTD
Parties
Claimant: Antron Express Limited; Defendant/appellant: All Best Accessories Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 November 2015
Case Number
HCSA53/2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Exclusion Clauses, Implied Terms, Delivery Delays, Unconscionability, Leave to Appeal
Source Language
CH
Contract Law Consumer Law Civil Procedure Small Claims Exclusion Clauses Implied Terms Delivery Delays Unconscionability +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Antron Express Limited

Claimant

All Best Accessories Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether shipment delays entitled defendant to refuse payment of invoices
  2. 2 Whether website statements as to delivery time formed contractual terms or guarantees
  3. 3 Whether exclusion clauses in the courier contract protected the claimant from liability for delay

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal refused because the tribunal's decision was a factual finding: the contract terms were incorporated, there was no agreed delivery date, the website statements were at most estimates and not proved to be binding contractual guarantees, the delays were caused by flight punctuality beyond the claimant's control and fell within the exclusion clause, and the defendant produced no persuasive evidence of reliance or that the terms were unconscionable; accordingly no arguable question of law or jurisdiction justified leave.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal refused