SCT Technologies v Western Copper: Dispute over Payment for Copper Balls

SCT Technologies Pte Ltd sued Western Copper Co Ltd in the High Court of Singapore, seeking US$1,274,741.73 for unpaid copper balls sold in 2007 and 2008. Western Copper argued that the sum had been paid. The court, presided over by Aedit Abdullah JC, found that SCT Technologies failed to prove that the payments made by Western Copper were for other purposes, and ruled in favor of Western Copper. SCT Technologies' claim was dismissed.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Defendant

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

SCT Technologies sued Western Copper for unpaid copper balls. The court found SCT Technologies failed to prove the payments were for other purposes.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
SCT TECHNOLOGIES PTE LTDPlaintiffCorporationClaim DismissedLost
WESTERN COPPER CO LTDDefendantCorporationJudgment for DefendantWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Aedit AbdullahJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Kelvin Lee Ming HuiWNLEX LLC
Ng HweelonVeritas Law Corporation

4. Facts

  1. SCT Technologies claimed US$1,274,741.73 from Western Copper for copper balls sold in 2007 and 2008.
  2. Western Copper argued that the sum had been paid.
  3. SCT Technologies and Western Copper were related companies.
  4. SCT Technologies claimed the payments made by Western Copper were for the benefit of Seah Metal Industries.
  5. The lawsuit was initiated in 2013.
  6. There was no contemporaneous record of the purpose of each payment.

5. Formal Citations

  1. SCT Technologies Pte Ltd v Western Copper Co Ltd, Suit No 751 of 2013, [2015] SGHC 135

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Invoice I 27678 issued for US$336,200.83
Invoice I 27712 issued for $646,212.06
Invoice I 28172 issued for US$614,671.57
SCT Technologies left the Advance SCT group
Action instituted
Judgment reserved
Appeal allowed by the Court of Appeal

7. Legal Issues

  1. Burden of Proof
    • Outcome: The court held that the burden of proof was on the Plaintiff to show that the payments received were not for the invoices in question.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2013] SGHC 144
      • [2008] SLR(R) 212
      • [2011] 2 SLR 63

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Manufacturing

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Ma Ong Kee v Cham Poh Meng and another suitHigh CourtYes[2013] SGHC 144SingaporeCited regarding the burden of proof of discharge or repayment.
Wee Yue Chew v Su Sh-HsyuSingapore High CourtYes[2008] SLR(R) 212SingaporeCited regarding the burden of proof of discharge or repayment.
Cooperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank BA (trading as Rabobank International), Singapore Branch v Motorola Electronics Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2011] 2 SLR 63SingaporeCited regarding the determination of the burden of proof based on pleadings.
Currie v DempseyN/AYes[1967] 2 NSWR 532New South WalesFollowed regarding the legal burden of proving a pleaded defence rests on the proponent of the defence.
Joseph Constantine Steamship Line, Limited v Imperial Smelting Corporation, LimitedN/AYes[1942] AC 154N/AReferred to regarding the burden of proof depends on the circumstances in which the claim arises.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Copper balls
  • Invoices
  • Payment
  • Burden of proof
  • Subsidiary
  • Related companies

15.2 Keywords

  • copper
  • payment
  • contract
  • Singapore
  • High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Contract Law70
Breach of Contract70
Burden of proof70
Commercial Disputes60
Commercial Law60
Evidence60
Documentary evidence50
Civil Procedure50

16. Subjects

  • Contract Dispute
  • Commercial Dispute