ZHONGSHAN SHENGWANG ELECTRICAL APPLIANCE CO., LTD. v TRIPLE D TRADING PTE. LTD.

[2023] SGHC 239 High Court (General Division) 30 August 2023 HC/S 189/2022

6 cases cited

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	30 August 2023
Judge	Hoo Sheau Peng
Charges / claim	Evidence, Contract
Counsel	Bird & Bird ATMD LLP, Sanders Law LLC, Adly Rizal bin Said, Lee Wei Han Shaun, Sarbrinder Singh s/o Naranjan Singh, Tay Yu E

Source: [2023] SGHC 239, High Court (General Division), decided 30 August 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Evidence — Admissibility of evidence Contract — Intention to create legal relations

Practice Areas

Evidence Contract

Judges (1)

Hoo Sheau Peng Delivered

Counsel (6)

Bird & Bird ATMD LLP Firm Sanders Law LLC Firm Adly Rizal bin Said Counsel for the plaintiff Lee Wei Han Shaun Counsel for the plaintiff Sarbrinder Singh s/o Naranjan Singh Counsel for the defendant Tay Yu E Counsel for the defendant

Parties (2)

Triple D Trading Pte Ltd Defendant Zhongshan Shengwang Electrical Appliance Co Ltd Plaintiff

Case Significance

Zhongshan Shengwang Electrical Appliance Co Ltd v Triple D Trading Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 239 is a reserved judgment of Hoo Sheau Peng J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 30 August 2023 in Suit No 189 of 2022. The plaintiff, Zhongshan Shengwang Electrical Appliance Co Ltd, a company incorporated in the People's Republic of China, claimed the outstanding purchase price of ceiling fans ordered by the defendant, Triple D Trading Pte Ltd, a Singapore company. Triple D contended that the goods were bought from and supplied by a third party, Zhongshan Tanfull Star Trade Co Ltd, so that Shengwang was not a party to the contracts and had no standing to sue; the catchwords address intention to create legal relations and admissibility of evidence. Hoo Sheau Peng J found in favour of Shengwang and allowed its claim for CNY1,885,630.

Summary

Zhongshan Shengwang Electrical Appliance Co Ltd, a Chinese manufacturer, claimed the outstanding purchase price of ceiling fans supplied to Triple D Trading Pte Ltd, a Singapore wholesaler, while Triple D contended the goods were bought from a third party, Tanfull, so Shengwang had no standing. The dispute turned on which party Triple D had contracted with and the admissibility of the relevant evidence. The court found Triple D had contracted directly with Shengwang and granted judgment for CNY1,885,630 with interest.

What was Zhongshan Shengwang Electrical Appliance Co Ltd v Triple D Trading Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 239 about?

It was a claim before Hoo Sheau Peng J by Chinese manufacturer Zhongshan Shengwang for the outstanding purchase price of ceiling fans supplied to Singapore company Triple D Trading Pte Ltd, decided on 30 August 2023 in Suit No 189 of 2022.

What was the outcome in [2023] SGHC 239?

Hoo Sheau Peng J found in favour of Zhongshan Shengwang and allowed its claim for CNY1,885,630, rejecting Triple D's contention that the ceiling fans had been bought from a third party, Zhongshan Tanfull Star Trade Co Ltd.