Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Goods sold and delivered

Legal area

Court

20 Sept 2019

SHINYEI (SHANGHAI) TRADING CO., LTD. v. JENUS TOP LTD

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2377
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA133/2019

The dismissal of the striking‑out application was affirmed because the Confirmation and pleaded facts suffice to disclose a reasonable cause of action for goods sold and delivered; the summary judgment was set aside because the buyer raised an arguable defence supported by factual disputes and the plaintiff's affirmations contained material deviations from the pleaded case, creating triable issues and preventing verification of the claim.
16 Mar 2016

HUIZHOU FOOK WOO PAPER CO LTD v. GREAT CONTINENTAL LTD

Citation

HUIZHOU FOOK WOO PAPER CO LTD v. GREAT CONTINENTAL LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA842/2013

Plaintiff proved the existence of the contracts, delivery of goods and non-payment into plaintiff's accounts; the defendant failed to substantiate its assertion of payment to a third party and did not participate at trial, therefore judgment is entered for the plaintiff for RMB5,207,154.76 with interest and costs.
18 Jan 2016

MILL-PRO (HONG KONG) LTD (formerly known as DASH SOLUTIONS LTD) v. POLLARD-CNCEC JOINT VENTURE

Citation

MILL-PRO (HONG KONG) LTD (formerly known as DASH SOLUTIONS LTD) v. POLLARD-CNCEC JOINT VENTURE
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2240/2015

Given Purchase Orders on defendant letterhead bearing its chop, delivery notes signed/stamped, substantial part payments and prolonged course of dealings, the plaintiff established a prima facie contract; the defendant's assertions that Tai lacked authority or that Kintech contracted with plaintiff were not credible and raised no triable issue; Turquand rule and apparent authority bind the defendant to the contract, entitling plaintiff to summary judgment for the outstanding sum.
31 Jan 2011

DELEEUW FLOWERBULB GROUP B.V v. LEUNG ON t/a ON WAH GRADEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

DELEEUW FLOWERBULB GROUP B.V v. LEUNG ON t/a ON WAH GRADEN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1437/2008

On the evidence and correspondence the defendant Leung Ah Choy (D2) held himself out as a partner of On Wah Garden and is therefore liable under s16 Partnership Ordinance; the counterclaim failed because there was no concluded agreement to supply to To & Ching Garden and no payment or other reliance to establish a contract.
3 Aug 2010

MARKETA INTERNATIONAL LTD v. POPBRIDGE INDUSTRIAL LTD

Citation

MARKETA INTERNATIONAL LTD v. POPBRIDGE INDUSTRIAL LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2098/2009

The court entered judgment for the plaintiff because the claim was supported by documentary evidence and the defendant failed to attend or adduce evidence, entitling the plaintiff to the claimed sum with interest and costs.
22 May 2009

TONEAST FOOTWEAR LTD v. WAI CHEONG HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

TONEAST FOOTWEAR LTD v. WAI CHEONG HOLDINGS LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ784/2002

Defendant failed to prove agency with IC (no written agency produced, contradictions in evidence) and failed to prove delay justified lawful cancellation; the Defendant stamped and accepted the bill of lading and goods were for its account and risk, therefore property passed and Defendant was liable to pay. Judgment entered for Plaintiff for 95% of invoice (US$41,275.98) and Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
10 Sept 2008

MOVIELEARN HONG KONG LTD v. GATEWAYS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Citation

MOVIELEARN HONG KONG LTD v. GATEWAYS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1448/2008

The defendant accepted the goods and failed to put forward a particularised, evidential defence; consequently there was no real prospect of defending the claim and summary judgment was entered for the plaintiff for the claimed sum with contractual interest and costs.
6 Jun 2008

FOOK LOONG (HK) LTD v. TOP SEASON ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

FOOK LOONG (HK) LTD v. TOP SEASON ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5673/2007

The court held that invoices for certain items were undisputed and summary judgment was appropriate for $33,665.76 with interest; the defendants' allegations about other goods were shadowy or unparticularised and did not defeat summary judgment, but the court granted conditional leave to defend those items provided the defendants deposit $81,178.51 into court within the stipulated time.
8 Jun 2007

HAMSTAR LTD v. GOLDEN WHEEL DIE CASTING FACTORY LTD

Citation

HAMSTAR LTD v. GOLDEN WHEEL DIE CASTING FACTORY LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2083/2006

The plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proving that the goods were supplied to the defendant or its subsidiary and did not plead fraud with the required particularity, therefore the claim for outstanding payments was dismissed.
15 Aug 2006

YIK FAI TARADING LTD v. UNICHEM ENTERPRISES CO LTD

Citation

YIK FAI TARADING LTD v. UNICHEM ENTERPRISES CO LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2231/2006

The defendant's unparticularised allegation that the goods were unmerchantable, unsupported by evidence or particulars and contradicted by its own fax seeking time to pay, did not raise a triable issue; accordingly Order 14 summary judgment was properly granted and the appeal was dismissed.