Culindo Livestock v Ananda UK: Breach of Contract for Supply of Ceftiofur Sodium
In a case before the Singapore High Court on 2014-09-10, Culindo Livestock (1994) Pte Ltd sued Ananda UK (China) Limited for breach of contract relating to 11 sales contracts for ceftiofur sodium sterile (CSS). Culindo claimed that Ananda supplied cefotaxime sodium (CFX) instead of CSS under the tenth and eleventh contracts. The court, presided over by Justice Tay Yong Kwang, allowed Culindo’s claim in part, finding that Ananda breached the implied condition that the goods would correspond with the description and were of satisfactory quality, and dismissed Ananda’s counterclaim for non-payment.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Culindo’s claim allowed in part and Ananda’s counterclaim dismissed in its entirety.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case involving Culindo Livestock and Ananda UK, concerning breach of contract for supplying cefotaxime sodium instead of ceftiofur sodium.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Culindo Livestock (1994) Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Claim allowed in part | Partial | |
| Ananda UK (China) Limited | Defendant | Corporation | Counterclaim Dismissed | Dismissed |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Tito Shane Isaac | Tito Isaac & Co LLP |
| Justin Chan | Tito Isaac & Co LLP |
| Sankaran Karthikeyan | Toh Tan LLP |
4. Facts
- Culindo purchased CSS from Ananda under 11 sales contracts between 2009 and 2011.
- The primary dispute concerns the tenth and eleventh contracts where Ananda was to supply 200kg of CSS per contract.
- Culindo's tests revealed that Ananda's CSS delivered under the tenth contract had a composition below the Chemtec standard.
- Tests on the eleventh contract shipments revealed one sample met the Chemtec standard, but the other fell short.
- Culindo requested Pacific Lab to compare Ananda’s CSS against the Sigma-Aldrich standard.
- Tests revealed that Ananda supplied cefotaxime sodium (CFX) instead of ceftiofur sodium (CSS).
- Culindo initiated attempts to resolve the issue, including requesting copies of the certificate of origin.
5. Formal Citations
- Culindo Livestock (1994) Pte Ltd v Ananda UK (China) Limited, Suit No 357 of 2012, [2014] SGHC 178
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Ananda sent an introductory email to Culindo offering CSS. | |
| First sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Second sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Third sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Fourth sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Fifth sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Sixth sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Seventh sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Eighth sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Ninth sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Tenth sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Eleventh sales contract between Culindo and Ananda. | |
| Culindo returned approximately 150kg of CSS to Ananda. | |
| Culindo sent samples for further tests by Pacific Lab. | |
| Suit No 357 of 2012 filed. | |
| Tay Kah Ann Peter’s Affidavit of Evidence-in-Chief dated 3 April 2014. | |
| Ngai Yuet Hoong’s Affidavit of Evidence-in-Chief dated 8 April 2014. | |
| Lim Hwee Jen’s Affidavit of Evidence-in-Chief dated 8 April 2014. | |
| Notes of Evidence, 20 May 2014. | |
| Decision Date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Contract
- Outcome: The court found that Ananda breached the implied condition under s 13(1) of the SGA by supplying CFX instead of CSS and breached the implied condition under s 14(2) of the SGA that the goods supplied would be of satisfactory quality.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to supply goods corresponding with description
- Supply of goods of unsatisfactory quality
- Related Cases:
- [2012] 1 SLR 152
- [2006] SGHC 242
- Implied Terms
- Outcome: The court held that there was no express or implied term that the source of CSS would be Chemtec and that there was no implied term that the Chemtec standard would be used to test the suitability and quality of the CSS.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Source of goods
- Standard for testing suitability and quality
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 4 SLR 193
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages
- Unjust Enrichment
- Total Failure of Consideration
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Pharmaceuticals
- Livestock
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compact Metal Industries Ltd v PPG Industries (Singapore) Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2006] SGHC 242 | Singapore | Cited for principles regarding sale by sample and satisfactory quality under the Sale of Goods Act. |
| Chai Cher Watt (trading as Chuang Aik Engineering Works) v SDL Technologies Pte Ltd and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 1 SLR 152 | Singapore | Cited for the interpretation of Section 13(1) of the Sale of Goods Act regarding the condition that goods correspond with their description. |
| National Foods Ltd v Pars Ram Brothers (Pte) Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 1048 | Singapore | Cited for principles governing the application of Section 14(2) of the Sale of Goods Act regarding satisfactory quality. |
| Sembcorp Marine Ltd v PPL Holdings Pte Ltd and another and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 193 | Singapore | Cited for the principles on the implication of terms in a contract. |
| Panwah Steel Pte Ltd v Koh Brothers Building & Civil Engineering Contractor (Pte) Ltd | Court of Appeal | No | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 571 | Singapore | Cited to emphasize that the court will not rewrite the contract for the parties. |
| Trollope & Colls Ltd v North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board | N/A | Yes | [1973] 1 WLR 601 | N/A | Cited to support the principle that the court will not improve the contract which the parties have made for themselves. |
| Bramhill v Edwards | N/A | Yes | [2004] 2 Ll Rep 653 | N/A | Cited for the burden of proof in alleging that goods are not of satisfactory quality. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Sale of Goods Act (Cap 393, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 13 of the Sale of Goods Act (Cap 393, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 14 of the Sale of Goods Act (Cap 393, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Ceftiofur Sodium Sterile
- Cefotaxime Sodium
- Chemtec Standard
- Sigma-Aldrich Standard
- Sale by Description
- Implied Condition
- Satisfactory Quality
- Breach of Contract
15.2 Keywords
- Ceftiofur Sodium
- Cefotaxime Sodium
- Breach of Contract
- Sale of Goods Act
- Singapore
- Commercial Dispute
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Sale of Goods | 85 |
| Breach of Contract | 80 |
| Contract Law | 75 |
| Commercial Law | 70 |
| Pharmaceutical Products | 65 |
| Performance of Contract | 60 |
| Warranties | 50 |
| Misrepresentation | 40 |
| Fraud and Deceit | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Contract Law
- Sale of Goods
- Commercial Law