Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Credit terms

Legal area

Court

23 Apr 2014

PEVONIA INTERNATIONAL LLC v. PEVONIA ASIA LTD

Citation

PEVONIA INTERNATIONAL LLC v. PEVONIA ASIA LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW417/2012

The court found the Company failed to show a bona fide defence on substantial grounds: the alleged 2009 understanding was not a binding contract between the Petitioner and the Company; the Petitioner validly held the debts (assignment supported and equitable estoppel applied because the Company repeatedly acknowledged and dealt with the Petitioner as creditor); the factual denials lacked credible supporting evidence; any cross-claim was quantitatively and evidentially insufficient to equal or exceed the petitioning debt; accordingly a winding-up order was made and costs ordered nisi to be pai…
7 Jun 2006

SUN TUNG ON CO LTD v. THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF LI KWONG MING, DECEASED

Citation

SUN TUNG ON CO LTD v. THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF LI KWONG MING, DECEASED
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4921/2004

The court accepted the Plaintiff's version of the contractual terms as more probable on the evidence, rejected the Defendant's assertions of a $30 per barrel deposit and broader discount entitlement as unproved and improbable, dismissed the counterclaim, and entered judgment for the Plaintiff for $151,800 with interest at 1% above prime from 25/8/04 to judgment and thereafter at judgment rate; costs to the Plaintiff and certificate for counsel.
8 Mar 2004

EVERGREEN YARN LTD v. WONG WAI BIU

Citation

EVERGREEN YARN LTD v. WONG WAI BIU
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ22693/2001

The court found on the documentary record and credibility that the defendant itself placed the orders and was the purchaser; only a limited quantity of yarn was defective and defendant's own 12 September 2001 list admitted indebtedness for outstanding invoices (subject to deduction for excessive delivery of HK$16,337); accordingly defendant was liable for the balance of the invoices and the invoice no.58520 was payable; judgment entered for plaintiff for HK$174,848 plus interest and costs.
1 Dec 2003

ITW ASIA (PTE) LTD v. TECHNOFIX LTD

Citation

ITW ASIA (PTE) LTD v. TECHNOFIX LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2742/2003

Although contemporaneous documents showed parties acted on a distributorship arrangement for 2002, the agreed term was one year to 30 November 2002. Variations in May 2002 were accepted. The alleged breaches in April 2003 occurred after the agreement's expiry and thus the Defendant failed to establish a real or bona fide defence. Summary judgment for the Plaintiff was therefore appropriate.
7 Nov 2001

Hung Ming Ho Company Ltd. v. V-Tex Garments Ltd. & another

Citation

Hung Ming Ho Company Ltd. v. V-Tex Garments Ltd. & another
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ15058/2000

The court preferred the plaintiff's witnesses and found that Mr. Chen gave an assurance to the plaintiff's representative that each defendant would be liable for the other's debts; on that basis the plaintiff was entitled to judgment against both defendants for the unpaid purchase price with interest; both defendants' counterclaims were dismissed for lack of credible and documentary proof of overpayment or damages.
20 Sept 2000

WIDECOVER CO. LTD. t/a JACO COLLECTION v. DJAUW DJIN

Citation

WIDECOVER CO. LTD. t/a JACO COLLECTION v. DJAUW DJIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA13642/1998

The defendant was held liable on the contracts because her representations and the established course of dealing established she was the contracting buyer, and no concluded settlement agreement was proved; judgment entered for the plaintiffs for the stated sums with interest and costs.
23 Apr 1999

CHINA-ART LAPIDARY FACTORY LTD. AND ANOTHER v. HUNG YUK LIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHINA-ART LAPIDARY FACTORY LTD. AND ANOTHER v. HUNG YUK LIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA13462/1996

On credibility and documentary analysis the judge accepted plaintiffs' evidence and rejected defendants'; the First Defendant contracted personally (jointly and severally with Second Defendant) and the oral agreement was for outright sale not consignment; alleged defects were minimal and unproven; therefore plaintiffs proved the claim and defendants' counterclaim failed.
29 May 1995

PETER JEWELLERY CO. v. DOUBLE JEWELLERY MANUFACTORY

Citation

PETER JEWELLERY CO. v. DOUBLE JEWELLERY MANUFACTORY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA12377/1994

The invoices, the conduct of the parties and the absence of any credible explanation or denial established that the first and third transactions were sales not consignments; the defendants' consignment defence was not credible and the appeals against the Order 14 judgments were dismissed.