VINSON ENGINEERING LTD v. KIN SHING ENGINEERING (H.K.) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

VINSON ENGINEERING LTD v. KIN SHING ENGINEERING (H.K.) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

The court concluded the alleged deferment agreement lacked consideration because it merely postponed payment of an existing, already-due debt; accordingly the agreement was unenforceable, the amended statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and must be struck out.

Citation
VINSON ENGINEERING LTD v. KIN SHING ENGINEERING (H.K.) CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Vinson Engineering Ltd.; 1st Defendant: Kin Shing Engineering (H.K.) Co. Ltd.; 2nd Defendant: Peter Lau & Co.
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 October 2007
Case Number
DCCJ489/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil (district Court) / Strike Out Application Under Order 18 Rule 19 — Decision
Outcome
Amended statement of claim struck out; plaintiff's action dismissed
Legal Topics
Consideration, Winding Up Petition, Strike Out for No Reasonable Cause of Action, Settlement Agreements, Damages for Business Loss
Source Language
EN
Contract Insolvency (winding Up/bankruptcy) Civil Procedure Costs Consideration Winding Up Petition Strike Out for No Reasonable Cause of Action Settlement Agreements +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vinson Engineering Ltd.

Plaintiff

Kin Shing Engineering (H.K.) Co. Ltd.

1st Defendant

Peter Lau & Co.

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (district Court) / Strike Out Application Under Order 18 Rule 19 — Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding settlement agreement was formed to defer payment by instalments
  2. 2 Whether the defendants' presentation of a winding-up petition breached any agreement or gave rise to actionable loss
  3. 3 Whether the alleged agreement was supported by consideration and thus enforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The court concluded the alleged deferment agreement lacked consideration because it merely postponed payment of an existing, already-due debt; accordingly the agreement was unenforceable, the amended statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and must be struck out.

Court Disposition

Amended statement of claim struck out; plaintiff's action dismissed

Orders

  • Amended statement of claim struck out
  • Action dismissed