11 Aug 2025
The petition was dismissed because the company established a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds: the Security Deed was unenforceable for want of authority as Ye had no actual authority and the petitioner failed to prove apparent authority or estoppel by convention; the alleged misrepresentation was not supported by admissible evidence of reliance and inducement.
30 Dec 2016
Plaintiffs failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that an express trust existed or that the Security Documents were genuine or that Wang's signature was authentic; the plaintiff's sole witness was found unreliable and key documents and contemporaneous evidence were lacking or inconsistent; therefore the claim was dismissed and the challenged transfer declared null and void with injunctive relief and costs ordered on a nisi basis.
14 Nov 2007
The application to join was dismissed because the applicant failed to prove a genuine sub-tenancy; the head lease was unstamped and therefore of no legal effect in the circumstances; and the purported signatory had neither actual nor ostensible authority to bind Success Chart, indicating the application was designed to obstruct the plaintiffs' claim.
5 Jan 1971
The judge found CAN 5 was not a binding contract because the evidence did not establish that it was validly completed or that the alleged $20,000 deposit was received; contemporaneous documents, pricing, delivery practice and witness credibility supported that deliveries were made under CAN 57; therefore Defendant owed for deliveries under CAN 57 and Plaintiff was entitled to judgment for $14,180.80 (amount due after accounting for the $5,000 deposit); the counterclaim based on CAN 5 was dismissed.