24 July 2019
The man said he could not accept that the bed he paid for would be used by his former girlfriend and her husband. Photos: HKEJ, Baidu
The man said he could not accept that the bed he paid for would be used by his former girlfriend and her husband. Photos: HKEJ, Baidu

Court rejects man’s appeal for ex-girlfriend to return mattress

The High Court on Wednesday rejected a request for an appeal of a lower court decision by building surveyor Woo Man-leung, who has demanded that her former girlfriend pay for a mattress originally priced at HK$5,000 plus transportation cost, Sing Tao Daily reports.

Woo, 39, said he met her ex-girlfriend surnamed Ting in 2014 and the two decided to get married later that year.

They wanted to buy a mattress advertised for HK$500, or 90 percent off its original price of HK$5,000, at a special sales fair in July 2014.

Woo said he queued up for more than 10 hours outside the shop in order to buy the mattress at the discounted price.

However, the girlfriend quarreled with the sales staff over the HK$400 delivery charge.

So Woo eventually agreed to pay HK$900 for the mattress and had it sent to Ting’s home.

Woo and Ting broke up in March 2015, and Woo decided to take back the mattress.

Woo said he had no intention of going to court, but Ting refused to respond despite his repeated attempts to talk to her and even with the help of a priest, the police and a mediation service.

In August last year Woo filed a claim to the Small Claims Tribunal after Ting refused to return the mattress.

Woo insisted that he had never intended to give Ting the mattress or the equivalent value of HK$900 as a gift.

He explained that he had the mattress delivered to Ting’s place only because he had no storage space at home.

In his ruling, High Court Judge Mr. Anderson Chow Ka-ming said the fact that the mattress was advertised to be originally priced at HK$5,000 does not mean that it was really worth HK$5,000.

He said Woo should have only asked for a compensation of HK$500.

The judge also ruled that Ting should not be made to shoulder the delivery charge as Woo himself said that he decided to send it to Ting because he ran out of storage space at home.

Chow also said Woo had admitted to the lower court judge that it is reasonable for the groom to pay for the wedding bed as that is the tradition.

It could also be considered an unconditional gift, as Woo did not ask Ting to return it throughout the intervening time before he filed a lawsuit.

Woo said while he was not surprised by the court ruling, he simply could not accept the fact that he paid for the wedding bed for his ex-girlfriend and her husband.

Ting was quoted by Apple Daily as saying that she and Woo had broken up four times during their 10-month relationship, adding that Woo has issues with his personality.

– Contact us at [email protected]


EJI Weekly Newsletter

Please click here to unsubscribe