ZIMMER SWEDEN AB v. KPN HONG KONG LTD AND ANOTHER

ZIMMER SWEDEN AB v. KPN HONG KONG LTD AND ANOTHER

The court held that the plaintiff's pleaded case included an allegation that an invoice relied on by the defendants was forged and that such an allegation of falsification/utterance of a forged document brings the action within the fraud exclusion of RHC Order 14 r 1(2)(b) as interpreted in A-1 Business; accordingly the summary judgment application was procedurally defective and had to be dismissed and the preliminary issue determined in the defendants' favour.

Citation
ZIMMER SWEDEN AB v. KPN HONG KONG LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Zimmer Sweden AB; 1st Defendant: KPN Hong Kong Limited; 2nd Defendant: Brand Trading Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 April 2015
Case Number
HCA2264/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Unjust Enrichment and Money Had and Received / Summary Judgment Application (decision on Preliminary Issue)
Outcome
Summary judgment application dismissed; preliminary issue determined in favour of the defendants
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, RHC Order 14 R 1(2)(b) Exclusion, Money Had and Received, Bona Fide Recipient, Forgery and Falsified Documents
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Restitution (unjust Enrichment) Fraud Summary Judgment RHC Order 14 R 1(2)(b) Exclusion Money Had and Received Bona Fide Recipient Forgery and Falsified Documents

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zimmer Sweden AB

Plaintiff

KPN Hong Kong Limited

1st Defendant

Brand Trading Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Unjust Enrichment and Money Had and Received / Summary Judgment Application (decision on Preliminary Issue)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim includes an allegation of fraud for the purposes of RHC Order 14 r 1(2)(b) which precludes summary judgment
  2. 2 Whether the defendants are bona fide recipients for value of the claimed sum
  3. 3 Whether invoices and supplier evidence relied on by defendants are forged or fictitious

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the plaintiff's pleaded case included an allegation that an invoice relied on by the defendants was forged and that such an allegation of falsification/utterance of a forged document brings the action within the fraud exclusion of RHC Order 14 r 1(2)(b) as interpreted in A-1 Business; accordingly the summary judgment application was procedurally defective and had to be dismissed and the preliminary issue determined in the defendants' favour.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment application dismissed; preliminary issue determined in favour of the defendants

Orders

  • Summary judgment application dismissed
  • Preliminary issue decided for the defendants