This judgment text has undergone conversion so that it is mobile and web-friendly. This may have created formatting or alignment issues. Please refer to the PDF copy for a print-friendly version.

In the High Court of the Republic of Singapore
[1997] SGHC 223
Suit No 1050 of 1988
Between
Himatsing Trading Co (Pte) Ltd
… Plaintiff
And
Continental Grain (S) Pte Ltd
… Defendant
grounds of decision

This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports.
Himatsing Trading Co (Pte) Ltd v Continental Grain (S) Pte Ltd
[1997] SGHC 223
Suit No 1050 of 1988
G P Selvam J
29 August 1997
1 
Judgment:

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 The contracts
8 
9 "Imyo Pte Ltd
10 70 Shenton Way
11 #04-03A Marina House
12 Singapore 0207
13 Dear Sirs
14 Contract No CGS DS 076/87-88
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 Packing In bulk
22 
23 
24 
25 Insurance Seller to cover
26 Others terms
27 
28 Other terms
29 
30 
31 .
32 Seller Buyer
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 TO: Continental Grain (S) Pte Ltd
39 Mr Goh yesterday evening, we confirm having bought and you confirm having

sold
accepted

by you
40 
41 
42 TO: Imyo Pte Ltd
43 CC: Continental Grain (S) Pte Ltd
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 Moisture and Volatile matter
50 
51 Flash Point...250 deg F Min
52 Phosphorous...0.035 PCT MAX
53 Contamination with fish oil
54 or marine animal oil...Negative
55 Packing In New Steel Drums
56 Weight 190 Kgs nett
57 16 Kgs Tare
58 206 Kgs Gross
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 The letter of credit
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 An alternate approach
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 this contract as void and null and reserve our right under our contract no

CGS DS 076/87-88
".[Emphasis added by me].
94 
95 
96 palm oil in

bulk
and not 1800 mt of soyabean oil in drums
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 G P SELVAM
102 JUDGE
G P Selvam J
Haresh Kamdar for the plaintiffs
Suresh Nair with Chan Hian Young for the defendants
Back to Top

This judgment text has undergone conversion so that it is mobile and web-friendly. This may have created formatting or alignment issues. Please refer to the PDF copy for a print-friendly version.

Version No 1: 11 Sep 2026 (01:05 hrs)