LEE TIT FAN v. STRONG BASE INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD AND ANOTHER

LEE TIT FAN v. STRONG BASE INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD AND ANOTHER

On the balance of probabilities the court found an oral agreement was made between Strong Base and Lee for HK$150,000 but Lee failed to prove non est factum or fraudulent misrepresentation so the written agreement signed with Strong Base was valid and superseded the oral terms; the machines were found not to be defective and Strong Base wrongfully repudiated the written agreement; accordingly judgment was entered for Lee against Strong Base for the unpaid balance of HK$40,738 with interest, Lee's claim against Kuen was dismissed and the defendants' counterclaim failed.

Citation
LEE TIT FAN v. STRONG BASE INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Lee; 1st Defendant: Strong Base; 2nd Defendant: Kuen
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 April 2012
Case Number
DCCJ3680/2008
Procedural Posture
Contract Dispute (sale of Machinery); Misrepresentation; Non Est Factum / District Court Judgment (trial) Transferred From Small Claims Tribunal
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff Lee against Strong Base for HK$40,738 with interest; Lee's claim against Kuen dismissed; Strong Base/Kuen counterclaim dismissed; costs nisi made
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Misrepresentation, Non Est Factum, Repudiation, Damages, Counterclaim, Parol Evidence Rule
Source Language
EN
Contract Tort Civil Procedure Sale of Goods Misrepresentation Non Est Factum Repudiation Damages +2 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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee

Plaintiff

Strong Base

1st Defendant

Kuen

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract Dispute (sale of Machinery); Misrepresentation; Non Est Factum / District Court Judgment (trial) Transferred From Small Claims Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral agreement existed and its terms (parties and consideration)
  2. 2 Whether the written agreement was null and void for non est factum or fraudulent misrepresentation
  3. 3 Whether the machines were defective entitling rescission under clause 1.6

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the court found an oral agreement was made between Strong Base and Lee for HK$150,000 but Lee failed to prove non est factum or fraudulent misrepresentation so the written agreement signed with Strong Base was valid and superseded the oral terms; the machines were found not to be defective and Strong Base wrongfully repudiated the written agreement; accordingly judgment was entered for Lee against Strong Base for the unpaid balance of HK$40,738 with interest, Lee's claim against Kuen was dismissed and the defendants' counterclaim failed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff Lee against Strong Base for HK$40,738 with interest; Lee's claim against Kuen dismissed; Strong Base/Kuen counterclaim dismissed; costs nisi made

Orders

  • Enter judgment for Lee against Strong Base for HK$40,738 plus interest at judgment rate from 20 May 2008 to date of judgment and thereafter until payment
  • Lee's claim against Kuen dismissed