VASTCO TEXTILES LTD v. SUPER GLORY CORPORATION LTD

VASTCO TEXTILES LTD v. SUPER GLORY CORPORATION LTD

Plaintiff proved only that the sample fabrics were ordered by and delivered to Super Glory (or its authorised staff) and is therefore entitled to payment of HK$101,122.00; plaintiff failed to prove an oral promise by Mr Chan on the Team Creative claim, failed to show defendant assumed liability for Siu Cheung supply (privity issue), and failed to establish that Li Dong acted as defendant's agent for the Li Dong invoices (insufficient evidence of authority), so those claims are dismissed.

Citation
VASTCO TEXTILES LTD v. SUPER GLORY CORPORATION LTD
Parties
Plaintiff: Vastco; Defendant: Super Glory
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 March 2012
Case Number
HCA1678/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial (debt/contract) / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff in part; plaintiff succeeds on sample invoices only and other claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Goods and Sale, Agency Liability, Privity of Contract, Payment of Invoices, Witness Credibility, Costs
Source Language
EN
Contract Agency Commercial Law Civil Procedure Evidence Goods and Sale Agency Liability Privity of Contract +3 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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vastco

Plaintiff

Super Glory

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial (debt/contract) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant liable for payment of sample invoices for goods delivered
  2. 2 Whether defendant promised to pay Team Creative invoice (oral promise)
  3. 3 Whether defendant liable for Siu Cheung invoice given separate contract/privity

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff proved only that the sample fabrics were ordered by and delivered to Super Glory (or its authorised staff) and is therefore entitled to payment of HK$101,122.00; plaintiff failed to prove an oral promise by Mr Chan on the Team Creative claim, failed to show defendant assumed liability for Siu Cheung supply (privity issue), and failed to establish that Li Dong acted as defendant's agent for the Li Dong invoices (insufficient evidence of authority), so those claims are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff in part; plaintiff succeeds on sample invoices only and other claims dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of HK$101,122.00.
  • Interest to accrue on such sum at the rate of 1% over Hong Kong prime rate from time to time prevailing from the date of the writ to the date of judgment herein.