Qroi Ltd v Ian Pascoe: Breach of Warranty of Authority Dispute

In Qroi Ltd v Ian Pascoe and Grant Thornton Advisory Services Co, Ltd, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal against the Assistant Registrar's decision to dismiss the first defendant's application to strike out the plaintiff's claim for breach of warranty of authority. The plaintiff, Qroi Ltd, claimed that Ian Pascoe misrepresented his authority when entering into an agreement for services. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the plaintiff's claim was reasonable and should be tested at trial.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs reserved to the trial judge.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court dismissed an appeal to strike out Qroi Ltd's claim against Ian Pascoe for breach of warranty of authority regarding a service agreement.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Qroi LimitedPlaintiffCorporationClaim not struck outNeutral
Ian PascoeDefendant, AppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Grant Thornton Advisory Services Co, LtdDefendantCorporationClaim not struck outNeutral

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiff, Qroi Limited, is a Hong Kong company providing technical services to mobile operators.
  2. The first defendant, Ian Pascoe, is the managing partner of Grant Thornton Advisory Services Co, Ltd and other Grant Thornton entities in Thailand.
  3. The plaintiff and the first defendant entered into a letter of intent dated 19 August 2016 for services.
  4. The plaintiff claims the first defendant represented he was acting on behalf of Grant Thornton Thailand.
  5. The plaintiff alleges non-payment of services delivered under the agreement.
  6. The first defendant claims he was acting on behalf of Grant Thornton Advisory Services Co, Ltd, not Grant Thornton Thailand.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Qroi Ltd v Pascoe, Ian and another, HC/Suit No 119 of 2018 (HC/Registrar’s Appeal No 6 of 2019), [2019] SGHC 36

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Letter of intent signed
First defendant applied to strike out the plaintiff’s action
Hearing date
Hearing date
Judgment date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Warranty of Authority
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff's claim for breach of warranty of authority was reasonable and should be tested at trial.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [1997] 1 SLR(R) 751
  2. Striking Out
    • Outcome: The court held that the threshold for striking out was not met.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Warranty of Authority

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Technology
  • Mobile Communications

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Rainbow v HowkinsKing's BenchYes[1904] 2 KB 322EnglandCited regarding the argument that an agent is not responsible for loss caused by his principal’s non-performance.
Fong Maun Yee v Yoong Weng Ho RobertHigh CourtYes[1997] 1 SLR(R) 751SingaporeCited to support the argument that the first defendant is liable for the loss caused to the plaintiff as a result of the first defendant’s breach of his warranty of authority.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O 18 r 19(1)(a) Rules of Court
O 18 r 19(1)(b) Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Warranty of Authority
  • Letter of Intent
  • Striking Out
  • Proper Party
  • Non-payment

15.2 Keywords

  • breach of warranty
  • striking out application
  • agency
  • contract
  • singapore high court

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Civil Litigation
  • Agency
  • Contract