CHAN SIU KING v. MP HONG KONG LTD

CHAN SIU KING v. MP HONG KONG LTD

The Tribunal's factual finding that the bed sheets did not correspond with the description as a health product and were not of merchantable quality was open on the evidence (notably the Consumer Council report and expert testimony demonstrating no net FIR transfer to the user); no error of law was shown on appeal, so the appeals were dismissed.

Citation
CHAN SIU KING v. MP HONG KONG LTD
Parties
Appellant (defendant): MP Hong Kong Limited; Respondent (claimant): Wong Hiu Ling; Respondent (claimant): Wong Kim Hang; Respondent (claimant): Chan Siu King; Respondent (claimant): Lee Yee Wah; Respondent (claimant): Szeto Oi Ying; Respondent (claimant): Lee Chor Wan
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 April 2004
Case Number
HCSA6/2003
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal Appeal (court of First Instance) / Judgment Delivered After Hearing on Appeal
Outcome
All appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Merchantable Quality, Description of Goods, Expert Evidence, Standard of Appellate Review, Relevance of Publications and Patents
Source Language
EN
Sale of Goods Consumer Law Evidence Appeal Merchantable Quality Description of Goods Expert Evidence Standard of Appellate Review +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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MP Hong Kong Limited

Appellant (defendant)

Wong Hiu Ling

Respondent (claimant)

Wong Kim Hang

Respondent (claimant)

Chan Siu King

Respondent (claimant)

Lee Yee Wah

Respondent (claimant)

Szeto Oi Ying

Respondent (claimant)

Lee Chor Wan

Respondent (claimant)

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal Appeal (court of First Instance) / Judgment Delivered After Hearing on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Small Claims Tribunal erred in law in finding the bed sheets did not correspond with their description as a health product and were not of merchantable quality
  2. 2 Whether the expert evidence relied on by the respondents was based on improper assumptions and thus insufficient to support the Tribunal's conclusions
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in excluding the Maeda publication and giving little weight to patent material

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's factual finding that the bed sheets did not correspond with the description as a health product and were not of merchantable quality was open on the evidence (notably the Consumer Council report and expert testimony demonstrating no net FIR transfer to the user); no error of law was shown on appeal, so the appeals were dismissed.

Court Disposition

All appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • All appeals dismissed
  • Order nisi for costs in favour of each respondent