Read the full judgment text of HCA 000960/1980 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 29 March 1984 before Power J.
Civil procedure – judgment debt – interest under section 49 of the Supreme Court Ordinance – estoppel by representation – whether representee suffered a detriment – whether section 48(2) prohibits interest upon interest – summary judgment obtained by plaintiffs for US$1,164,225 plus interest – defendant sought to make payment by telegraphic transfer – plaintiffs took instructions and claimed further interest – whether defendant established detriment to found estoppel or acquiescence – held no detriment established because defendant merely refrained from paying and continued to have use of its own funds – Farquharson v Pearl Assurance Co distinguished as involving specific tender and clear detriment – Habib Bank v Habib Bank A.G. and Greasley v. Cooke considered on burden of proving reliance and detriment – burden lies on representee to prove detriment – not satisfied – Prikhom Investments Ltd. v. Carr applied regarding presumption of influence of representation – accrued interest crystallised into sum certain on payment of judgment debt on 11 January 1983 – section 48(2) does not prevent further interest under section 49 on that crystallised sum – plaintiffs entitled to interest at specified rate from 17 December 1982 to date of judgment and to interest on $19,566.82 from 11 January 1983.
Legal issues: Whether defendant established detriment sufficient to support estoppel/acquiescence against interest claim · Whether there was a valid tender or waiver of payment · Whether the court may award interest on accrued interest under section 49
Outcome: Plaintiffs entitled to interest at the specified rate on the judgment debt from 17 December 1982 to the date of judgment, and to interest under section 49 on the accrued interest sum of $19,566.82 from 11 January 1983.