Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Delivery and acceptance

Legal area

Court

18 Jul 2018

MEI SHENG TEXTILES VIETNAM CO. LTD. v. CHINA GRACE GARMENT LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1688
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2311/2013

The defendant's evidence raised arguable triable issues but was insufficiently particularised and supported by contemporaneous documents; therefore final summary judgment was inappropriate but conditional leave to defend was granted on payment into court of the judgment sum within 28 days, failing which the plaintiff may enter final judgment for US$196,747.50 with interest and costs.
15 Jan 2016

YAU LIENG HUI XIN INDUSTRIALCO LTD v. PC PARTNER LTD

Citation

YAU LIENG HUI XIN INDUSTRIALCO LTD v. PC PARTNER LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3744/2014

Property in the manufactured plastic products passed to the buyer prior to physical delivery by unconditional appropriation with implied assent; risk therefore passed to the buyer and the buyer cannot withhold payment absent proof of non-conformity. The buyer failed to prove non-conformity because the inspection reports were inadmissible or inadequately supported and many alleged defects were attributable to delay in delivery and storage for which the buyer was at fault. Consequently the plaintiff is entitled to recover the price reduced to reflect conceded wrong delivery and a 2% defect allo…
16 May 2008

TECH GAIN INTERNATIONAL LTD v. LA WIN TRADING LTD

Citation

TECH GAIN INTERNATIONAL LTD v. LA WIN TRADING LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6361/2006

The plaintiff wrongfully cancelled the contract. By accepting part of the shipment and negotiating replacements the plaintiff waived deadlines; the defendant was willing to perform. Consequently the plaintiff's claim is dismissed and judgment entered for the defendant's counterclaim for storage charges and interest.
29 Jan 2002

SURE WOOLLEN YARNS CO LTD v. GLOBAL APPAREL GROUP LTD

Citation

SURE WOOLLEN YARNS CO LTD v. GLOBAL APPAREL GROUP LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ13107/2001

The purchase order expressly required panel/sample approval before delivery; the defendant's unparticularised but credible evidence that initial and subsequent samples were unsatisfactory created a clear triable issue whether the plaintiffs delivered/produced before approval and whether delivered goods conformed to the contract; accordingly summary judgment was inappropriate and the defendants were granted unconditional leave to defend.
15 Jan 2002

HING KWOK INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. v. CHAN YUK MUI t/a CHEUNG SHING HONG FASHION TRADING CO.

Citation

HING KWOK INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. v. CHAN YUK MUI t/a CHEUNG SHING HONG FASHION TRADING CO.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA12429/1999

The plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant agreed to be the purchaser or was the principal for Mr Chow; the contemporaneous documents were consistent with a device whereby Mr Chow ordered and paid for goods delivered to the defendant's premises for onward removal, and there was insufficient affirmative evidence of authority or agreement by the defendant to render her liable for the price. Therefore the claim for the balance fails.
22 Jul 1998

KOOLDUCT LTD. v. AMEC ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERS LTD.

Citation

KOOLDUCT LTD. v. AMEC ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERS LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5661/1997

Defendant failed to produce any evidence establishing that Ideal withheld approval or any other defence fit for trial; accordingly summary judgment is appropriate and plaintiff is entitled to judgment for the amount claimed with interest and costs.
19 Apr 1996

William Artists International Ltd. v. Chevalier (Hong Kong) Ltd.

Citation

William Artists International Ltd. v. Chevalier (Hong Kong) Ltd.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA10706/1994

On the facts the court implied a contractual term that the table's colour had to be within the range exemplified by the Tecno walnut wood sample and the inspected desktop; the delivered table fell outside that range, entitling the Defendant to reject, to repayment of the deposit with interest and to damages for loss of use measured by the rental value from 12 December 1994 until removal; costs awarded to Defendant (order nisi).
4 Apr 1995

EVERHARVEST WEAVING FACTORY LTD. v. LUNG TANG GARMENT MANUFACTURING LTD.

Citation

EVERHARVEST WEAVING FACTORY LTD. v. LUNG TANG GARMENT MANUFACTURING LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4752/1993

Court held that, as a matter of fact and law, plaintiff breached the contracts by supplying fabrics that, after washing, displayed unacceptable colour differences from the Fornari standard; defendant had waived most claims about late delivery by conduct and payment but proved specific losses (discounts/reimbursements, additional washing and transport) recoverable; plaintiff entitled to recover outstanding purchase price while defendant entitled to specified items on its counterclaim; costs and interest reserved.
LAWERENCE LAU v. EVER MATE INDUSTRIAL LTD

Citation

LAWERENCE LAU v. EVER MATE INDUSTRIAL LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA8616/1993

The Master found the two contracts are separate and independent; on the balance of probabilities the contemporaneous correspondence and credible witness evidence established the allocation of payments such that the defendant had paid HK$5,230,100.07 under the April 28, 1992 contract and therefore owed the plaintiff HK$653,668.23; the defendant's contrary evidence and challenges to the documents were not sufficiently cogent to rebut the plaintiff's case.