Carriernet Global Ltd v Abkey Pte Ltd: Dispute over Keyboard Manufacturing Agreement and Delayed Inventory Delivery

In a dispute before the High Court of Singapore, Carriernet Global Ltd sued Abkey Pte Ltd for loss and damage incurred as a result of the termination of a manufacturing agreement. Abkey counterclaimed for loss and damage, limited to damages arising from Carriernet's delayed delivery of inventory. The court, presided over by Justice Kan Ting Chiu, entered interlocutory judgment on Abkey's counterclaim, with damages to be assessed by the Registrar, finding that Abkey's claim was not extinguished by res judicata and that Abkey had the right to sue under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Interlocutory judgment is entered on the counterclaim with damages to be assessed by the Registrar.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Carriernet Global Ltd sues Abkey Pte Ltd over a terminated keyboard manufacturing agreement. Abkey counterclaims for damages due to delayed inventory delivery.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Carriernet Global LtdPlaintiffCorporationClaim not proceeded withDismissed
Abkey Pte LtdDefendantCorporationCounterclaim AllowedPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kan Ting ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Rasanathan s/o SothynathanColin Ng & Partners LLP
Jimmy Yap Tuck KongColin Ng & Partners LLP
Wong Shyen SookColin Ng & Partners LLP
Boey Swee SiangRajah & Tann LLP
Chou TzuRajah & Tann LLP
Leong Jia Rong LynetteRajah & Tann LLP

4. Facts

  1. Bob Teo invented a computer keyboard and obtained a patent.
  2. Abkey Pte Ltd was intended to commercialize the keyboard invention.
  3. Carriernet Global Ltd purchased shares in Abkey and entered into a manufacturing agreement.
  4. The manufacturing agreement was terminated by mutual consent.
  5. Negotiations for Carriernet to sell its shares back to Bob Teo and release inventory ensued.
  6. Bob Teo filed Suit 243 for specific performance of the settlement agreement.
  7. Carriernet sought relief from Abkey for loss and damage from the termination of the manufacturing agreement.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Carriernet Global Ltd v Abkey Pte Ltd, Suit No 269 of 2007, [2010] SGHC 104

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Manufacturing agreement signed
Manufacturing agreement terminated by mutual consent
Negotiations for share sale and inventory release
Suit No 243 of 2007 filed
Suit No 269 of 2007 filed
Judgment in favour of Bob Teo in Suit 243
Plaintiff company delivered the inventory to Abkey
Counterclaim incorporated into the counterclaim
Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found that Abkey could enforce the delivery term of the contract and claim damages for its breach.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Delayed delivery of inventory
  2. Res Judicata
    • Outcome: The court held that Abkey's claim was not extinguished by res judicata because Abkey's damages were distinct from any damages Bob Teo may have incurred.
    • Category: Procedural
  3. Third Party Rights
    • Outcome: The court held that Abkey, as a third party, had the right to sue on the contract between Bob Teo and the plaintiff company under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Manufacturing
  • Technology

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Teo Seng Kee Bob v Arianecorp LtdHigh CourtYes[2008] 3 SLR(R) 1114SingaporeCited for the judgment in Suit 243, which is relevant to the res judicata issue in the present case.
Henderson v HendersonN/AYes[1843–60] All ER Rep 378N/ACited for the principle of res judicata, specifically that parties must bring their whole case forward in litigation.
Alliance Concrete Singapore Pte Ltd v Comfort Resources Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2009] 4 SLR(R) 602SingaporeCited for the principle that every breach of contract entitles the innocent party to claim damages as of right.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act (Cap 53B, 2002 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Keyboard
  • Manufacturing agreement
  • Inventory
  • Settlement agreement
  • Res judicata
  • Third party rights
  • Damages
  • Late delivery

15.2 Keywords

  • contract
  • agreement
  • keyboard
  • manufacturing
  • damages
  • singapore
  • high court
  • res judicata
  • third party rights

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act90
Contract Law85
Breach of Contract70
Damages65
Res Judicata60
Estoppel50

16. Subjects

  • Contract Law
  • Commercial Dispute
  • Third Party Rights