Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Delivery orders

Legal area

Court

29 May 2006

SERAWAK (KT) CO LTD v. WAI SUN CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CO LTD

Citation

SERAWAK (KT) CO LTD v. WAI SUN CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2311/2005

The defendant's correspondence conceding indebtedness in the order of the claimed sum, combined with failure to particularise credible, believable defences under Order 14 (and reliance on speculation about delivery orders, invoices, signatures and non-attribution), meant there was no real prospect of a successful defence; therefore summary judgment was appropriate for the claimed sum with interest.
21 Jun 2005

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 constituted a binding contract imposing immediate obligations; approval of Production Samples was a verification process (not a condition precedent); the Defendant failed to prove the Production Samples differed in colour or quality from approved samples; ss.16(2)(b) and 16(3) did not assist the Defendant; the Defendant wrongfully repudiated the contract and Plaintiff was entitled to damages of HK$169,380 plus interest and costs.
3 Aug 2004

RELIANCE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION LTD v. HAI SANG LOGISTICS LTD

Citation

RELIANCE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION LTD v. HAI SANG LOGISTICS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA396/2003

The defendant was the plaintiff's bailee as shown by contemporaneous faxes and conduct; no compromise agreement existed; the defendant released the 20 coils to Mr Lam without plaintiff's prior knowledge or authority and cannot invoke jus tertii because it did not act by authority of Mr Lam; the wrongful release constituted conversion and damages are the full value of the goods (US$152,660.40) with interest and costs.
10 Oct 1983

CHOI HUNG & SONS TRANSPORTATION CO LTD v. TAT MING AIR FORWARDING LTD

Citation

CHOI HUNG & SONS TRANSPORTATION CO LTD v. TAT MING AIR FORWARDING LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4671/1981

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the defendants repudiated the 16 April 1981 booking-note on 2 May 1981; plaintiffs failed to prove any substantial loss except a subsisting liability to their subcontractor, and accordingly the plaintiffs were entitled only to nominal damages of HK$25 and a declaration that the defendants must indemnify plaintiffs against the subcontractor's claim up to HK$48,000; the defendants' counterclaim was dismissed.
15 May 1978

BANK NEGARA INDONESIA v. THE HONG KONG AND KOWLOON WHARF AND GODOWN CO LTD

Citation

BANK NEGARA INDONESIA v. THE HONG KONG AND KOWLOON WHARF AND GODOWN CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1141/1969

On balance the court found the goods were genuine and valued as per the commercial documents; the defendant released the goods pursuant to a forged endorsement and its servant failed to perform the contractual obligation to compare endorsements with supplied authorised signatures; that failure was a fundamental breach (or deviation) that resulted in total loss and rendered further performance impossible; therefore the defendant could not rely on its exclusion or limitation clauses and was liable to the plaintiff for the full amount claimed with costs.

Hong Kong Case Law

SERAWAK (KT) CO LTD v. WAI SUN CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CO LTD

SURE WOOLLEN YARNS CO LTD v. GLOBAL APPAREL GROUP LTD

RELIANCE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION LTD v. HAI SANG LOGISTICS LTD

CHOI HUNG & SONS TRANSPORTATION CO LTD v. TAT MING AIR FORWARDING LTD

BANK NEGARA INDONESIA v. THE HONG KONG AND KOWLOON WHARF AND GODOWN CO LTD