The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd v Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd: Breach of Contract in E-Commerce Portal Development

In 2003, The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd sued Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd in the High Court of Singapore, alleging breaches of contract and service agreement related to the development of an e-commerce portal. The plaintiffs claimed the defendants failed to deliver a fully functional portal. Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd counterclaimed for unpaid configuration/licensing and hosting fees. Lai Siu Chiu J dismissed the plaintiffs' claim, finding they had failed to prove the alleged breaches, and ruled in favor of the defendants' counterclaim for unpaid fees and charges.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiffs' claim dismissed with costs; judgment for the defendants on their counterclaim.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd sued Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd for breach of contract related to an e-commerce portal. The court dismissed the claim and ruled in favor of Horizon.iTech's counterclaim.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte LtdPlaintiffCorporationClaim DismissedLost
Horizon.iTech Pte LtdDefendantCorporationCounterclaim AllowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Siu ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Chong Boon LeongRajah & Tann
Ngooi Shih LoongRajah & Tann
Alan Koh Khong KhaiKT Lim & Co
Vincent Lim MiangKT Lim & Co

4. Facts

  1. The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd was formed to establish an e-commerce portal for legal advice.
  2. Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd agreed to develop the portal for The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd.
  3. An Internet Portal Services and Licence Agreement was signed on 24 August 2000.
  4. The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd alleged that Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd breached the agreement by failing to deliver a fully functional portal.
  5. Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd counterclaimed for unpaid configuration/licensing and hosting fees.
  6. The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd signed various User Acceptance Tests confirming completion of work phases.
  7. The portal was publicly launched on 21 September 2000.

5. Formal Citations

  1. The Portal WW.Legal.com. Pte Ltd v Horizon.iTech Pte Ltd, Suit 1455/2001, [2003] SGHC 11

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Memorandum signed between the partners, Alsagoff and Michale, for the defendants to develop the portal for the plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs received in-principle endorsement from the Law Society for their project.
Non-Disclosure Agreement signed by the defendants.
Defendants prepared a Proposal for an Electronic Commerce Hub for the plaintiffs.
PEX delivered a prototype of the portal to the plaintiffs for demonstration purposes.
Plaintiffs accepted the Portal Functionality Acceptance Test by signing it.
Plaintiffs introduced the defendants' staff to technicians from Connect! Pte Ltd.
Lim acknowledged the Portal User Acceptance Test (phase 2B).
Internet Portal Services and Licence Agreement signed.
Phase 3 of the portal was configured by the defendants and received by the plaintiffs.
Parties agreed to postpone the public launch to 21 September 2000.
Plaintiffs signed off the defendants' Functionality Acceptance Test for Phase 2A, subject to further testing.
Plaintiffs signed off the defendants' User Acceptance Tests for Phases 2B and 3, subject to further testing and changes requested.
Lim approved Phase 3 of the portal by e-mail.
Portal publicly launched at the Singapore Academy of Law.
Portal received its first membership application.
Defendants made minor changes to Phase 3 of the portal at the plaintiffs' request.
Lim expressed satisfaction with the third party e-mail module provided by the defendants via e-mail.
An actual transaction occurred on the portal.
Defendants claimed they handed back all materials to the plaintiffs.
Service Level Agreement signed.
Defendants received a Change Request Form from the plaintiffs requesting variation work to the payment loop.
Variation work was configured and received by the plaintiffs.
User Acceptance Test for the variation work was signed off by the plaintiffs.
It was minuted that all problems encountered by the plaintiffs as a result of additional variation works had been resolved.
Plaintiffs commenced proceedings.
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the alleged breaches of contract.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to deliver a functional e-commerce portal
      • Failure to provide agreed-upon features
      • Failure to provide adequate hosting facilities
      • Failure to provide firewall protection
  2. Substantial Performance
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendants had substantially performed their obligations under the agreement.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Liquidated Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Technology Contracts
  • Software Development Agreements

11. Industries

  • Legal Services
  • Information Technology

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Browne v DunnN/ANo(1893) 6 R 67N/ACited regarding unchallenged testimony of the defendants' witnesses.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Evidence Act Cap 97Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • E-commerce portal
  • User Acceptance Test
  • Service Level Agreement
  • Firewall protection
  • Hosting charges
  • Configuration fee
  • Payment loop
  • Chatroom
  • Bulletin board

15.2 Keywords

  • e-commerce
  • portal
  • breach of contract
  • software development
  • hosting
  • legal services
  • singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Contract Law90
Breach of Contract90
Commercial Litigation70
Commercial Disputes60
E-Commerce40
IT Law30
Civil Procedure30
Summary Judgement30

16. Subjects

  • Contract Dispute
  • E-Commerce
  • Information Technology