PRISM TECHNOLOGY LTD v. TOPWIN & COMPANIES LTD

PRISM TECHNOLOGY LTD v. TOPWIN & COMPANIES LTD

Topwin's signing and return of PS3 purchase orders established acceptance of fixed shipment dates which, given the commercial context and Sony's deadline, were of the essence; Topwin's failure to deliver by those dates and its failure to obtain Sony approval for improved samples entitled Prism to treat remaining PS3 contracts as repudiated and recover foreseeable losses (airfreight and loss of profit); no concluded contract existed for Xbox headsets because Xbox POs/SCs were not accepted/signed; PS3 toolings were payable and settled, Xbox tooling deposit recoverable due to failure of consideration.

Citation
PRISM TECHNOLOGY LTD v. TOPWIN & COMPANIES LTD
Parties
Plaintiff (hca 1190); Defendant (hca 1930): Prism Technology Limited; Defendant (hca 1190); Plaintiff (hca 1930): Topwin & Companies Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 March 2015
Case Number
HCA1190/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract (sale of Goods) / Judgment (court of First Instance, 30 March 2015)
Outcome
Judgment for Prism in HCA 1190/2011 for US$144,321.64 (loss of profit) and US$175,508.22 (airfreight losses); Topwin's counterclaim dismissed. In HCA 1930/2011 Topwin's claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Late Delivery, Non Delivery, Repudiation, Measure of Damages, Time of Essence, Acceptance by Conduct, Toolings/moulds, Contract Formation
Source Language
EN
Contract Sale of Goods Commercial Law Remedies Late Delivery Non Delivery Repudiation Measure of Damages +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prism Technology Limited

Plaintiff (hca 1190); Defendant (hca 1930)

Topwin & Companies Limited

Defendant (hca 1190); Plaintiff (hca 1930)

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract (sale of Goods) / Judgment (court of First Instance, 30 March 2015)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What were the agreed shipment dates for the PS3 headsets?
  2. 2 Whether time of shipment was of the essence.
  3. 3 Whether Topwin breached by failing to meet agreed shipment dates.

Ratio Decidendi

Topwin's signing and return of PS3 purchase orders established acceptance of fixed shipment dates which, given the commercial context and Sony's deadline, were of the essence; Topwin's failure to deliver by those dates and its failure to obtain Sony approval for improved samples entitled Prism to treat remaining PS3 contracts as repudiated and recover foreseeable losses (airfreight and loss of profit); no concluded contract existed for Xbox headsets because Xbox POs/SCs were not accepted/signed; PS3 toolings were payable and settled, Xbox tooling deposit recoverable due to failure of consideration.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Prism in HCA 1190/2011 for US$144,321.64 (loss of profit) and US$175,508.22 (airfreight losses); Topwin's counterclaim dismissed. In HCA 1930/2011 Topwin's claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment in HCA 1190/2011 for Prism against Topwin for US$144,321.64 and US$175,508.22.
  • Judgment to carry interest at 1% above prevailing US dollar prime lending rate from date of Writ to date of judgment; thereafter judgment rate until paid.