Sunny Daisy Ltd v WBG Network: Summary Judgment Appeal on Debt for Goods Sold
Sunny Daisy Ltd, a Taiwanese company, sued WBG Network (Singapore) Pte Ltd in the High Court of Singapore for US$1,057,164.03, representing the balance of payment for goods sold and delivered between May 2003 and September 2004. WBG Network raised defenses including that Sunny Daisy acted as an agent for Internation Chlorella Co, Ltd, that the amount claimed was excessive due to credit notes, and that the goods were not of merchantable quality. The Assistant Registrar granted conditional leave to defend, but Judith Prakash J allowed Sunny Daisy's appeal, granting judgment for US$611,764.03 plus interest, staying execution pending the trial of WBG Network's counterclaim. The court found WBG Network liable for the debt, rejecting the defenses raised.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding a debt for goods sold. The court granted summary judgment to Sunny Daisy, finding WBG Network liable for the debt.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sunny Daisy Ltd | Plaintiff, Appellant | Corporation | Appeal allowed | Won | L Kuppanchetti Nadimuthu, Christopher Buay |
| WBG Network (Singapore) Pte Ltd | Defendant, Respondent | Corporation | Appeal dismissed | Lost | Peter Gabriel, Ismail bin Atan |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| L Kuppanchetti Nadimuthu | Alban Tay Mahtani & De Silva |
| Christopher Buay | Alban Tay Mahtani & De Silva |
| Peter Gabriel | Gabriel Law Corporation |
| Ismail bin Atan | Gabriel Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- The plaintiff sued the defendant for US$1,057,164.03 for goods sold.
- The goods were supplied between May 2003 and September 2004.
- The defendant made partial payments between January and September 2004.
- The defendant claimed the plaintiff was an agent of Internation Chlorella Co, Ltd.
- The defendant alleged the goods were not of merchantable quality.
- The defendant issued purchase orders to the plaintiff.
- The defendant on-sold the goods to its customers.
5. Formal Citations
- Sunny Daisy Ltd v WBG Network (Singapore) Pte Ltd, Suit 470/2005, RA 372/2005, [2006] SGHC 130
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Goods supplied by plaintiff to defendant commenced | |
| Defendant remitted moneys to plaintiff in partial payment | |
| Earliest returns by customers were effected | |
| Goods supplied by plaintiff to defendant ended | |
| Defendant remitted moneys to plaintiff in partial payment ended | |
| Promissory Note issued | |
| Taiwanese law firm sent letter to defendant’s previous solicitors | |
| Plaintiff started action | |
| Assistant registrar granted defendant conditional leave to defend | |
| Plaintiff filed further affidavit exhibiting purchase orders | |
| Appeal heard | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Admissibility of Further Evidence on Appeal
- Outcome: The court held that the defendant had not satisfied the conditions for admitting further evidence.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1954] 1 WLR 1489
- [2004] 2 SLR 392
- Proper Creditor
- Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff was the proper creditor.
- Category: Substantive
- Merchantable Quality of Goods
- Outcome: The court held that the defendant had accepted the goods and was limited to a counterclaim for damages.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ladd v Marshall | N/A | Yes | [1954] 1 WLR 1489 | N/A | Cited for the conditions to be met for adducing further evidence on appeal. |
| Lassiter Ann Masters v To Keng Lam | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2004] 2 SLR 392 | Singapore | Cited for the application of Ladd v Marshall principles in a registrar's appeal. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Sale of Goods Act (Cap 393, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 35(1) of the Sale of Goods Act (Cap 393, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 35(4) of the Sale of Goods Act (Cap 393, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Summary Judgment
- Conditional Leave to Defend
- Merchantable Quality
- Sale of Goods
- Creditor
- Purchase Orders
- Credit Notes
- Promissory Note
15.2 Keywords
- sale of goods
- summary judgment
- appeal
- contract
- debt
16. Subjects
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
- Commercial Law
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Commercial Transactions
- Sale of Goods