SHING CHEONG PAPER MERCHANTS LTD v. VITA PRINTING CO LTD AND ANOTHER

SHING CHEONG PAPER MERCHANTS LTD v. VITA PRINTING CO LTD AND ANOTHER

The defence and counterclaim lacked credible documentary evidence and particulars to show any binding obligation by the plaintiff to accept orders or to account for assigned quotas; the assertions were found unbelievable and the counterclaim was frivolous and practically moonshine, therefore summary judgment was appropriate for the undisputed debt with interest and costs.

Citation
SHING CHEONG PAPER MERCHANTS LTD v. VITA PRINTING CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: SHING CHEONG PAPER MERCHANTS LIMITED; 1st Defendant: VITA PRINTING COMPANY LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: CHOW SEK TONG
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 June 2007
Case Number
DCCJ5554/2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Summary Judgment Under Order 14 of the Rules of the District Court (claim for Price of Goods and Guarantor Liability) / Hearing on Summary Judgment; Decision Delivered (summary Judgment Granted)
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd Defendants jointly and severally.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Counterclaim, Quota Assignment, Import Duty, Evidence Sufficiency, Interest, Costs
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Civil Procedure Commercial Law Sale of Goods Guarantee Law Customs and Import Regulation Summary Judgment Counterclaim +5 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SHING CHEONG PAPER MERCHANTS LIMITED

Plaintiff

VITA PRINTING COMPANY LIMITED

1st Defendant

CHOW SEK TONG

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Summary Judgment Under Order 14 of the Rules of the District Court (claim for Price of Goods and Guarantor Liability) / Hearing on Summary Judgment; Decision Delivered (summary Judgment Granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants' counterclaim alleging liability for import duty and related losses was credible and supported by evidence
  2. 2 Whether there existed a binding obligation on the plaintiff to accept all purchase orders or to supply goods to the extent of assigned quotas
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment on the undisputed debt

Ratio Decidendi

The defence and counterclaim lacked credible documentary evidence and particulars to show any binding obligation by the plaintiff to accept orders or to account for assigned quotas; the assertions were found unbelievable and the counterclaim was frivolous and practically moonshine, therefore summary judgment was appropriate for the undisputed debt with interest and costs.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd Defendants jointly and severally.

Orders

  • Judgment for the Plaintiff in the sum of $210,617.60
  • Interest on the judgment sum at judgment rate from 11 April 2006 until payment in full