Barun Electronics v. EZY Infotech: Summary Judgment for Unpaid Invoices Dispute
In a suit before the High Court of Singapore, Barun Electronics Co Ltd, the plaintiff, sought summary judgment against EZY Infotech Pte Ltd, the defendant, for USD 490,443.42 in unpaid invoices related to the manufacturing of memory cards. The defendant raised counterclaims for delays and defective goods. The court allowed the appeal in part, granting the defendant conditional leave to defend part of the claim amounting to USD 25,343.92 and substituting the original judgment with a revised judgment against the defendant for USD 465,099.50. The court declined to order a stay of execution of the revised judgment pending the determination of the defendant’s counterclaims.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed in Part
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court grants partial summary judgment to Barun Electronics for unpaid invoices, addressing counterclaims of delay and defects.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barun Electronics Co Ltd | Plaintiff, Respondent | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff | Partial | Leong Yu Chong Aaron, Cherisse Foo Ling Er |
| EZY Infotech Pte Ltd | Defendant, Appellant | Corporation | Conditional Leave to Defend, Appeal Dismissed in Part | Partial, Lost | Charmaine Chan-Richard, Sharmila Sanjeevi |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| S Mohan | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Leong Yu Chong Aaron | Oon & Bazul LLP |
| Cherisse Foo Ling Er | Oon & Bazul LLP |
| Charmaine Chan-Richard | Legis Point LLC |
| Sharmila Sanjeevi | Legis Point LLC |
4. Facts
- Plaintiff sued Defendant for USD 490,443.42 in unpaid invoices.
- Plaintiff manufactured memory cards from semi-conductor wafers sold by Defendant.
- Defendant claimed Plaintiff failed to deliver memory cards on time.
- Defendant claimed a shortfall in the quantity of memory cards delivered.
- Defendant claimed some Ink Die cards delivered were faulty or defective.
- Defendant did not dispute the quantum of the unpaid invoices.
- Defendant made a partial payment of USD 50,000 in January 2019.
5. Formal Citations
- Barun Electronics Co Ltd v EZY Infotech Pte Ltd, Suit No 621 of 2019 (Registrar’s Appeal No 367 of 2019), [2020] SGHC 154
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Defendant paid Plaintiff USD 50,000. | |
| Appeal and SUM 479/2020 heard. | |
| Judgment delivered orally, allowing appeal in part. | |
| Grounds of decision issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Summary Judgment
- Outcome: The court granted partial summary judgment, finding that the defendant did not demonstrate a fair or reasonable probability of a bona fide defence regarding the USD 465,099.50 Invoices.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Triable issues of fact
- Plausible defence
- Bona fide defence
- Breach of Contract
- Outcome: The court found that the defendant's counterclaims for breach of contract (delay and shortfall) were not plausible and did not warrant unconditional leave to defend.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to deliver on time
- Shortfall in quantity
- Defective goods
- Set-off
- Outcome: The court determined that the defendant's counterclaims did not amount to a valid defence of set-off against the plaintiff's claim for the USD 465,099.50 Invoices.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Legal set-off
- Equitable set-off
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Summary Judgment
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Failure to pay invoices
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Summary Judgment
11. Industries
- Electronics
- Technology
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M2B World Asia Pacific Pte Ltd v Matsumura Akihiko | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 1 SLR 325 | Singapore | Cited for the legal principles governing an application for summary judgment and the burden on the defendant to establish a real or bona fide defence. |
| Prosperous Credit Pte Ltd v Gen Hwa Franchise International Pte Ltd and others | High Court | Yes | [1998] 1 SLR(R) 53 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a mere assertion in an affidavit is insufficient to resist an application for summary judgment. |
| Abdul Salam Asanaru Pillai (trading as South Kerala Cashew Exporters) v Nomanbhoy & Sons Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 856 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that affidavits in summary judgment applications are not to be accepted without rational consideration. |
| Bank Negara Malaysia v Mohd Ismail | High Court | Yes | [1992] 1 MLJ 400 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that leave will not be granted if assertions in the affidavit are equivocal, lacking in precision, inconsistent with undisputed contemporary documents or other statements from the same deponent, or inherently improbable in themselves. |
| Kim Seng Orchid Pte. Ltd. v. Lim Kah Hin (trading as Yik Zhuan Orchid Garden) | High Court | Yes | [2018] 3 S.L.R. 34 | Singapore | Cited for the approach to be adopted in determining whether summary judgment ought to be ordered where there is a subsisting counterclaim. |
| Akfel Commodities Turkey Holding Anonim Sirketi v Townsend, Adam | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 412 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that conditional leave to defend is warranted where the defendant's evidence has not yet reached the level of showing a reasonable probability of a bona fide defence. |
| Hiap Tian Soon Construction Pte Ltd and another v Hola Development Pte Ltd and another | High Court | Yes | [2003] 1 SLR(R) 667 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the loss nevertheless has to be quantifiable by means of a reasonable assessment made in good faith. |
| Pacific Rim Investments Pte ltd v Lam Seng Tiong and another | High Court | Yes | [1995] 2 SLR(R) 643 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the loss nevertheless has to be quantifiable by means of a reasonable assessment made in good faith. |
| Naughty G Pte Ltd v Fortune Marketing Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 1208 | Singapore | Cited for the argument that where a dispute relates to an oral agreement, summary judgment should generally not be granted. |
| Hawley & Hazel Chemical Co (S) Pte Ltd v Szu Ming Trading Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2008] SGHC 13 | Singapore | Cited in an attempt to persuade the court that there should be a stay of execution pending the determination of the defendant’s counterclaims even if the court was of the view that the counterclaims were not viable. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| O 14 r 3 of the Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Summary Judgment
- Invoices
- Memory Cards
- Semi-conductor Wafers
- Ink Die Cards
- Counterclaim
- Set-off
- Delay
- Shortfall
- Defective Goods
15.2 Keywords
- summary judgment
- unpaid invoices
- memory cards
- breach of contract
- singapore
- commercial dispute
16. Subjects
- Contract Dispute
- Commercial Dispute
- Civil Procedure
- Summary Judgment
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Commercial Law