B24 CIV Singapore Legal Practice Directions PDF

B24 CIV Source of law Supreme Court Court of Appeal Division 1 48\. President and Vice-Presidents 49\. Jurisdiction --- general 50\. Composition --- general 51\. Decisions how made 52\. Sittings Division 2 --- Civil jurisdiction 53\. Civil jurisdiction 54\. Composition --- further provis...

B24 CIV Source of law Supreme Court Court of Appeal Division 1 48\. President and Vice-Presidents 49\. Jurisdiction --- general 50\. Composition --- general 51\. Decisions how made 52\. Sittings Division 2 --- Civil jurisdiction 53\. Civil jurisdiction 54\. Composition --- further provisions 55\. Oral hearing not needed for appellate matters generally 56\. Summary dismissal of certain matters 57\. Applications 58\. Incidental directions and interim orders 59\. Hearing of appeals 60\. Costs of appeal 60A. New trial 60B. Immaterial errors 60C. Appeal not to operate as stay of execution or enforcement Division 3 --- Criminal jurisdiction 60D. Criminal jurisdiction 60E. Composition when exercising criminal jurisdiction Division 4 --- Post-appeal application in capital case and finding of abuse of process 60G. Application for permission to make PACC application 60H. Hearing of PACC application 60F. Interpretation of this Division 60I. Procedure for making PACC application, etc., when there is pending PACC application, etc. 60J. Court of Appeal may determine whether application is, or action contains, application for PACC permission or PACC application, etc. 60K. Operation of Division 1B of Part 20 of Criminal Procedure Code 2010 60L. Stay of execution of death sentence 60M. Power of Court of Appeal to make finding of abuse of process when dealing with application or action Appellate Division of the High Court Division 1 --- General 30\. President 31\. Jurisdiction --- general 32\. Composition --- general 33\. Decisions how made 34\. Sittings Division 2 --- Civil jurisdiction 35\. Civil jurisdiction 36\. Composition --- further provisions 37\. Oral hearing not needed for appellate matters generally 38\. Summary dismissal of certain matters 39\. Applications 40\. Incidental directions and interim orders 41\. Hearing of appeals 42\. Costs of appeal 43\. New trial 44\. Immaterial errors 45\. Appeal not to operate as stay of execution or enforcement Division 3 --- Matters that are non-appealable or appealable only with permission 46\. No appeal in certain cases 47\. Permission required to appeal General Division of the High Court Division 4 --- Appellate jurisdiction 19\. Appellate criminal jurisdiction 20\. Appellate civil jurisdiction 21\. Appeals from District and Magistrates' Courts State Courts Magistrates' Court Less than S\$60,000 District Court Less than S\$250,000 Practice Directions Pre-Action considerations Managing the relationship with the client i\. Documenting the terms of engagement. ii. Ensuring that there are no conflicts of interest (for the purpose of this module, the candidate should be aware that proper conflict checks must be done pre- engagement; the substantive rules on conflicts of interest are beyond the scope of this module). iii. Running anti-money laundering checks (for the purpose of this module, the candidate should be aware that AML checks need to be done; how exactly these checks are done is beyond the scope of this module). iv. Taking and documenting the client's instructions. **[Considerations]** prior to commencement of legal proceedings ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- Is there a cause of action? Is the action time barred? is the limitation period still valid? s6 of the Limitation Act Amicable Resolution (**[Order 5 Rule 1(2)]**) a positive duty to consider amicable resolution before starting an action and also during the course of any action or appeal. So see in this regard, Order 5, Rule 11 of the Rules of Code 2021. there is a requirement for a party to make an offer of amicable resolution before starting the action, unless the party has reached the ground stock to do so. For this, we will see Order 5, Rule 1-2. An offer of amicable resolution for this purpose means an offer to settle the action or appeal, or making an offer to resolve the dispute other than by litigation, whether in court or in part. Where do you sue? jurisdictional limitations of the state courts i.e. Magistrates' Court Less than S\$60,000 District Court Less than S\$250,000 IF higher, then general division of the high court. Parties\' duty to consider offer of amicable resolution before commencing action, unless there are reasonable grounds not to do so i\. Parties have a duty to consider amicable resolution before commencement and during the course of any action. See Order 5 Rule 1(1) of the ROC 2021. ii. A party is to make an offer of amicable resolution before commencing action, unless the party has reasonable grounds not to do so. See Order 5 Rule 1(2) of the ROC 2021. Also see Order 5 Rule 2 of the ROC 2021 for the terms of an offer of amicable resolution. iii. The Court may order parties to attempt amicable resolution. See Order 5 Rule 3 of the ROC 2021. Any jurisdictional clauses ? jurisdictional clauses in any contracts that are applicable to the dispute. So for example, if there are any arbitration clauses in any applicable contracts, you should consider whether your dispute that you wish to bring in court falls within the scope of the agreement to arbitrate, or whether it falls outside the scope, in which case you may be able to sue in court. Are there any **[special considerations]** due to the status of your client or the other side? Are there any pre-action protocols? (O11R11) **[O11R11 Pre-action Production]** pre-action production of documents and information is permissible to "identify possible parties to any proceedings, to enable a party to trace the party's property or for any other lawful purpose, in the interests of justice" Production of documents (O11R11) 1. 2. 3. Necessity has to be understood in the light of the purpose for which pre-action discovery is sought, which is to assist a plaintiff, who suspects that he has a case against the other party, to obtain the necessary information to allow him to commence proceedings. **[The court will not order production where there is no likelihood of proceedings commencing in Singapore]** **the procedure is not meant to be employed as an instrument to embarrass and/or oppress others.** - - - - - - - - - A. B. C. D. E. Disclosing party is generally entitled to costs (O11R11(3)) There are **[two Modes of Action]** Does a written law or the ROC 2021 require that the proceedings must be begun by Originating Application or is the proceeding an application to the Court under any written law? **[Where there are material facts in dispute]** writ of summons = **[Originating claim]** Originating application = **[Orignating summons]** Form Endorsements Issue and Duration = 3 months from issuance Renewal = 3 months extension If YES, then you must use an Originating Application. See Order 6 Rule 1(3)(a) and Rule 1(3)(b). Are material facts in dispute? If YES, then you must use an **[Originating Claim]**. See Order 6 Rule 1(2). Form 8 of Appendix A to PDs 2021 (Order 6 Rule 5(1) of ROC 2021) -**[It is important to note that you are only allowed to use a general endorsement which set out a brief description of the claim if the matter is a special case.]** Originating Claim (Endorsement, Issuance, Validity and Renewal) **[renew twice and not more than 3 months each]** Is the sole or primary issue a question of construction of any written law, instrument or document or **[some question of law]**? If YES, you must use an [**Originating** **Application**]**.** See Order 6 Rule 1(3)(c). Originating Application (Endorsement, Issuance, Validity and Renewal) - **[Affidavit containing all evidence]** Originating Application coversion to Originating Claim ( **[O15R7(6)(c)]**) Form Contents of affidavit Issue and duration Renewal **[Service]** When is personal service required? (O7R1(1)(a)) Personal service is permitted when (a) personal service, where expressly required by these Rules or any written law, or where the Court orders such service, or where the serving party decides to do so voluntarily; who may effect Personal Service? (**[O7R2(2)]**) = \(2) The following persons may effect personal service: (a) a process server of the Court; (b) a solicitor; (c) a solicitor's employee; (d) a litigant who is not legally represented or such a person's employee; or (e) any other person that the Registrar may allow in a particular case or generally. (3) If the process server of the Court effects service, the Registrar must notify the requesting person of the fact and manner of such service. **[Substituted Service]**(**[O7R7]**) Substituted service operates as an exception to the rule of personal service when personal service is impractical or impossible. There may be a variety of reasons why personal service is not feasible: the defendant's whereabouts may be unknown, or the defendant is evading service. Substituted service therefore provides methods of service that are most likely to bring the document to the personal attention of the defendant in place of personal service\.... **[Ordinary Service - 6 ways for effective ordinary services (O7R3)]** a. i. ii. b. c. i. ii. d. e. \(a) by leaving the document at or posting it to --- (i) in the case of a natural person, the person's usual or last known address or the business address of the person's solicitor; or (ii) in the case of an entity, its registered or principal office or, if none exists, its last known place of business or its solicitor's address; (b) by electronic mail at the electronic mail address provided by the party to be served; (c) by fax, but only if --- (i) both the serving party and the party to be served act by solicitor; and (ii) the solicitor acting for the party\... **[Service]** must be effected **[timely (O7R8)]** +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | (5) |   | | | | | | **Failure to Serve** | | | | | | [Order 9, Rule 5, | | | ROC] | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | (1) | If the claimant **[a\^ends the | | | case | | | conference] **but has | | | not served the claimant's | | | origina\^ng claim or origina\^ng | | | applica\^on on the defendant, the | | | Court --- | | | | | | a. b. | | | | | | | | | | | | i. ii. | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | (2) | If the claimant fails to serve | | | the origina\^ng process **[by the | | | second case | | | conference]**, **the | | | Court may dismiss the ac\^on.** | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ **[(1) Subject to any written law and these Rules (including Order 28 regulating the electronic filing service), when service is effected before 5pm on any particular day, service is deemed to have been effected on that day. (2) When service is effected after 5pm on any particular day, service is deemed to have been effected on the following day\....]** D. Service of originating claim or originating application **[Requirement to take reasonable steps to effect service]**: Originating Claim (where there is dispute of fact) Order 6 Rule 5(6) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the origina\^ng claim is to be **[served in Singapore]**, **reasonable steps to serve on the defendant must be made as soon as possible and, in any event, within 14 days a\^er the origina\^ng claim is issued.** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Order 6 Rule 5(7) Originating Application Order 6 Rule 11(4) +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | If the origina\^ng applica\^on is to be **[served in | | Singapore]**, reasonable steps to serve the origina\^ng | | applica\^on and the suppor\^ng affidavit on the defendant must be | | made as soon as possible and, in any event, **within 14 days a\^er | | the origina\^ng applica\^on is issued.** | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ |   | | | |   | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ Order 6 Rule 11(5). **[Order 7 Rule 8]**, failing which, Court may dismiss the claim under **[Order 9 Rule 5]** read with **[Para 64]** of the SCPD 1. 2. Order 9 Rule 5: Failure to effect service may result in **[dismissal of the action]** +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | If the claimant **[a\^ends the case conference] **but has | | not served the claimant's origina\^ng claim or origina\^ng | | applica\^on on the defendant, the Court --- | | | | a. b. | | | | | | | | i. ii. | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | If the claimant fails to serve the origina\^ng process **[by the | | second case conference]**, **the Court may dismiss the | | ac\^on.** | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ Para 64 PD - Court\'s power to dismiss action **[Service out of jurisdiction]** Affidavit is to state: (i) why the Court has the jurisdiction or is the appropriate court to hear the action; (ii) in which country or place the defendant is, or probably may be found; and (iii) whether the validity of the originating process needs to be extended. \*Overriding rule that nothing is to be done that is contrary to the laws of the foreign country: see **[Order 8 Rule 2(6)]** what are the three matters that need to be stated whether the Court is the \"appropriate court\"? **[Order 8 Rule 1(1) read with Para 63 of the PD]** (must show that the Court has **[jurisdiction]** or is the **[appropriate court]**). 1. 2. a. b. c. 3. 4. 1. 2. a. b. c. 3. a. b. c. d. i. ii. iii. iv. e. f. i. ii. g. h. i. j. k. l. m. n. o. p. q. r. s. t. Manharlal Trikamdas Mody v Sumikin Bussan International (HK) Ltd \[2014\] 3 SLR 1161 at \[78\]--\[84\] (full and frank disclosure arguably still required). **[6 ways]** How to effect **[service out of jurisdiction O8R2]** (a) according to the manner contractually agreed between the parties; (b) where there is a "Civil Procedure Convention" governing service in the foreign country, according to the manner provided in that convention (see Third Schedule to ROC 2021 for the list of Civil Procedure Conventions); (c) through the government of the foreign country if that government is willing to effect service; (d) through the judicial authority of the foreign country if that authority is willing to effect service; (e) through a Singapore consular authority in that foreign country; (f) according to the manner provided by the law of that foreign country. Pleadings **[Statement of Claim (Originating Claim)]** Initial Steps Statement of claim must be **[endorsed]** and served within **[14 days (Order 6 Rule 5)]** Format of the Statement of Claim (Form 9 of Appendix A to the Supreme Court PD, read with Order 6 Rule 5(3)) ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- **[Notice of Intention to Contest]** **[14 or 21 days]** (**[Order 6 Rule 6(1) & (2)]**) Effect of failure to file (**[O6R6(4)]**) **[Failure = default judgement]** Application for default judgement (**[Para 108 PD]**)) 1. a. b. c. 2. 3. Defence and Counterclaim Defence Time for service: **[21 days or 5 weeks]** (**[Order 6 Rule 7(1) -(2)]**) 1. 2. Format of the defence must be in Form 13 (Order 6 Rule 7(3)) ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- 1. 1. a. b. c. d. e. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. a. b. 9. a. b. c. 10. a. b. c. Challenging jurisdiction (Order 6, Rules 7(4)-(6)) **must file and serve a defence [stating the ground on which the defendant is challenging the jurisdiction of the Court]** Effect of failure to file (Order 6 Rule 7(7) read with Form 14 Appendix A to the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021) **[Failure = Defualt judgement]** Counterclaim Counterclaim to be filed and served with defence (Order 6 Rule 8(1)) within 14 days Defence to Counterclaim (O6R9) **[within 14 days]** **[Each Party entitled to file only one round of pleadings.]** Further pleadings requires approval (Order 6 Rule 10) **[Originating Application]** Miscellaneous points Affidavits Defendant\'s Affidavits (**[Where jurisdiction is challenged]**) Time for service Order 6 Rule 12(1) and (2) = **[21 days or 5 weeks]** after service of the originating application and affidavit Contents where jurisdiction is filed and justidiction being challenged (ORder 6 Rule 12 (3), (4) and (5) ) (a) An affidavit on the merits need not be filed. Instead, the affidavit is to state the ground on which the defendant is challenging the jurisdiction of the court. See Order 6 Rule 12(3) of the ROC 2021. (b) A challenge to jurisdiction may be on the basis that the Court has no jurisdiction or on the basis that the Court should not exercise its jurisdiction to hear the action. See Order 6 Rule 12(4) of the ROC 2021. (c) The filing of an affidavit challenging the jurisdiction of the court is not treated as a submission to jurisdiction. See Order 6 Rule 12(5) of the ROC 2021. Contents where jurisdiction is **[not]** challenged (Order 6 Rule 13) **[must contain all evidence necessary or material to the defence]** Case Conference In general When will the **[first case conference]** be held? (Order 9 Rule 1(1)-(3)) = **[8 or 12 weeks]** **[Defendant\'s chance to file challege of court\'s jurisdiction after Case Conference]** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Where jurisdiction is challenge An affidavit on the merits need [not] be filed. Instead, the affidavit is to state the ground on which the defendant is challenging the jurisdiction of the court. See Order 6 Rule 12(3) of the ROC 2021. Where jurisdiction is **[not challenged]** Must contain all evidence that is necessary or material to the defence: See Order 6 Rule 13. Purpose of a case conference (Order 9 Rule 2). = The Court takes control of the proceedings, sets timelines and gives directions for the proceedings. Non-disclosure of communications (Order 9 Rule 3) Rule 3 assures the parties that they would be able to communicate with candour during the case conference where **[confidential or privileged communication will not be disclosed to the trial judg]**e. Such communications are particularly necessary, given the court's broad ambit under Order 5, including suggesting solutions for the amicable resolution of the dispute to the parties under Order 5 rule 3(5). Rule 3 gives effect to section 23(1) of the Evidence Act 1893 (2020 Rev Ed) and also makes clear that the qualifications to that provision in section 23(2) of the Evidence Act would also apply to communications\... Orders that may be made in the event of the absence of parties (O9R5) Rule 5 is new and incentivises the claimant to observe the timelines prescribed by Order 6 rules 5 and 11 to take reasonable steps to effect service on the defendant within the validity of the originating process. It thereby gives effect to the shortened validity and renewal periods for originating processes under Order 6 rule 3. The implication of rule 5(1)(a) is that a claimant who commences an action in court is under an obligation to take reasonable steps to effect service expeditiously, failing which he would run the risk of having his action dismissed. The court may allow the claimant to take certain remedial actions by a second case conference under rule 5(1)(b), **[failing which he faces the same prospect of having his action dismissed.]** **[Pre-Case Conference Questionnaire]** (Para 56 Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021) - The Pre-Case Conference Questionnaire requires parties to indicate whether their case is an **[appropriate case for AEICs to be filed before production of documents]**: ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- 1. a. b. c. d. 2. a. b. c. 3. a. b. c. d. e. 4. i. ii. 5. a. b. c. d. e. 6. a. b. c. 7. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. i. ii. 8. a. b. c. Challenging jurisdiction raised in Defendant\'s defence/affidavit (Order 9 Rule 7(2))) a. b. c. AEIC\'s before Documents when? when there are few disputes on facts. (O9R8) The Court may order that AEICs be exchanged before the parties exchange documents (O9R8) **[In principle, the claimant is to proceed on the strength of his own case and not on the weakness of the defendant's case]**. Under rule 8, the court will first determine whether the list of witnesses and AEICs of all or some of the witnesses should be filed before the production of documents under Order 10. If so, the court will then determine whether the AEICs should be filed simultaneously or in a particular sequence. Rule 8(1) was drafted to provide the court with the discretion to order AEICs to be filed simultaneously or in any sequence to ameliorate some of the difficulties that may arise from the filing and exchange of AEICs before production of documents: The court will not exercise its power under rule 8 if parties are unable to prepare their AEICs without the documentary evidence uncovered during the disclosure of documents. This is especially so for cases where there is **[asymmetry of information]** as the party without the necessary information may have difficulties preparing his AEICs without the disclosure of documents. ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- **Note that the Pre-Case Conference Questionnaire requires parties to indicate whether their case is an appropriate case for AEICs to be filed before production of documents**: see question 5a of Form B6 of Appendix B to the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021. Single Application Pending Trial SAPT (**[Only for originating claims]**, not for originating applications) **[When]**? and what is its purpose? (Order 9 Rule 9(1)) The Court will give directions for **[filing SAPT After AEICs before Documents]** or **[if AEICs before Documents are not ordered, then at that point]**. The purpose of case conferences is for the court to take control of the proceedings: see rule 2. Rule 9(1) is consistent with this purpose and demonstrates how the court has to consider all matters necessary to bring the proceedings ultimately to a conclusion with an eye on the Ideals. Other than the SAPT ordered by the court during the case conference under rule 9(2) and the applications exempted by rule 9(7), no other or further applications may be filed at any time unless approved by the court: see rules 9(7) and 9(8). 1. 2. What goes into the **[content?]** (Order 9 Rule (3) & (4)) ---------- --------- Progress 0% done ---------- --------- 1. 2. +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | \(b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) | Consolida\^on of ac\^ons; | | (j) (k) (l) | | | | Division of issues at trial to be | | | heard separately; | | | | | | Security for costs; | | | | | | Further and be\^er par\^culars of | | | pleadings; | | | | | | Amendment of pleadings; | | | | | | Filing of further pleadings; | | | | | | Striking out of part of an ac\^on | | | or of the defence; | | | | | | Judgment on admission of facts; | | | | | | Determina\^on of ques\^ons of law | | | or construc\^on of documents; | | | | | | Produc\^on of documents; | | | | | | Interim relief; | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ \(a) addition or removal of parties; (b) consolidation of actions; (c) division of issues at trial to be heard separately; (d) security for costs; (e) further and better particulars of pleadings; (f) amendment of pleadings; (g) filing of further pleadings; (h) striking out of part of an action or of the defence; (i) judgment on admission of facts; (j) determination of questions of law or construction of documents; (k) production of documents; (l) interim relief; (m) expert evidence and assessors; (n) independent witness and interested non-parties; and (o) independent counsel\.... **[SAPT checklist]** 12. 13. a. b. c. d. 14. 15. Form B8 **[Timelines]** (Order 9 Rule 9(5) read with Para 56(14) Supreme Court PD) To file SAPT checklist 1 week before the Relevant Regsitrar\'s Case Conference (\"RCC\"). To file SAPT (and affidavit) within 21 days from RCC **[\"carve out\"]** list of applications (Order 9 Rule 9(7)) - No application shall be made without court\'s approval 12. a. b. c. d. e. +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | \(f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) | Judgment in default of defence; | | | | | | Summary judgment; | | | | | | Striking out of the whole or an | | | ac\^on or defence; | | | | | | Stay of the whole ac\^on; | | | | | | Stay of enforcement of a judgment | | | or order; | | | | | | An enforcement order; | | | | | | Permission to appeal; | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ \(a) an injunction or a search order which may include an application for any other matter if it is incidental to the injunction or search order; (b) substituted service; (c) service out of Singapore; (d) setting aside service of an originating process; (e) judgment in default of a notice of intention to contest or not contest an originating claim; (f) judgment in default of defence; (g) summary judgment; (h) striking out of the whole of an action or defence; (i) stay of the whole action; (j) stay of enforcement of a judgment or order; (k) an enforcement order; (l) permission to appeal; (m) transfer of proceedings under the State Courts Act; (n) setting\... **[Need court approval for any exceptions]** Approval for **[non-carved]** out items, Prematurely or late (Order 9 Rule 9(8) and 9(9)) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ **(8) The Court's approval to file further applica\^ons other than those directed at a case conference must be sought by le\^er se\^ng out the essence of the intended applica\^on and the reasons why it is necessary at that stage of the proceedings.** \(9) The Court **may deal with the request by le\^er summarily or fix a case conference to deal with the ma\^er.** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Addition and Removal of Parties (Order 9 Rule 9(4)(a) and Order 9 Rule 10) **[No applications 14 days before trial, unless with judge approval]** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- 10. Consolidation, Joint Trials, Consecutive Trials ( (Order 9 Rule 9(4)(b) and Order 9 Rule 11)) - **[3 conditions - there is some common question of law in the actions;]** **[- the reliefs claimed in the actions concern or arise out of the same factual situation; or]** **[- it is appropriate to do so.]** 10. **[Security of Costs]** (Order 9 Rule 9(4)(d)); O9R12(1) &(2) - **[3 conditions Security of Costs are within SAPT Claimant who is ordinarily resident out of jurisdiction. Nominal claimant who is suing for some other person's benefit (but not suing in a representative capacity) or is being funded by a non-party and there is reason to believe that the claimant will be unable to pay the defendant's costs if ordered to do so. Claimant who has not stated or has incorrectly stated the claimant's address in the originating claim or originating application or has changed the claimant's address during the course of the proceedings so as to evade the consequences of litigation.]** ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ |   | [S 388, Companies | | | Act] | |   | | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | **(1)** | **Where a corpora\^on is claimant | | | in any ac\^on or other legal | | | proceeding the court having | | | jurisdic\^on in the ma\^er may, | | | if it appears by credible | | | tes\^mony that there is reason | | | to believe that the corpora\^on | | | will be unable to pay the | | | costs of the defendant if | | | successful in the defendant's | | | defence, require sufficient | | | security to be given for those | | | costs and stay all proceedings | | | un\^l the security is given.** | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | **(2)** | **The costs of any proceeding | | | before a court under this Act | | | must be borne by such party to | | | the proceeding as the court may, | | | in its discre\^on, direct.** | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ - - - - - - When will a court order security if the grounds for ordering security are present? Evidence of Financial Condition: The plaintiff must provide evidence of their financial condition and the potential impact of ordering security for costs. Consideration of Economic Conditions: The court takes into account prevailing economic conditions and their impact on the plaintiff\'s ability to provide security for costs. Order 9 Rule 9(4)(d) Security for costs if necessary for the case to proceed expeditiously Order 9 Rule 12 - **[3 threhold requirements]** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Additional requirements the Court will need consider, to exercise discretion to achieve just outcome ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- Nominal claimant suing for somone else\'s benefit - - - No permanent address - - - If claimant is a company - - Further and Better Particulars (only to OC proceedings) Under the purview of SAPT (Order 9 Rule 9(4)(e)) FBPT ordered by the court of necessary (Order 9 Rule 13) Court will order FBP if necessary from the facts of the case. Particulars must be distinguished from material facts and evidence. So material facts are things that must be pleaded in your pleadings, and if you do not plead material facts, then those are grounds for striking out. On the other hand, evidence should not be pleaded. ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Purpose of Particulars: (i) inform the opposing party of the nature of the case that it has to meet (contra the mode by which the case is to be proved; see \[12(b)\] below); (ii) prevent the opposing party from being taken by surprise at trial; (iii) enable the opposing party to know what evidence they ought to prepare for trial; (iv) limit the generality of the pleadings, the claim, or the evidence; (v) limit and define the issues to be tried, and as to which discovery is required; and (vi) tie the hands of the pleading party, so that it cannot, without leave of court, go into any matters not pleaded. \"Summary Table\" requirement (Para 68 Supreme Court PD, read with Form B10 of Appendix B) +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | **Case |   | | | | | | number** | | | | | | | |   | | | | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | **Case |   | | | | | | Title** | | | | | | | |   | | | | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | **Applica | Further | | | | | | tion | & Better | | | | | | for** | Particula | | | | | | | rs | | | | | | | / | | | | | | | Productio | | | | | | | n | | | | | | | of | | | | | | | Documents | | | | | | | *(Delete | | | | | | | as | | | | | | | appropria | | | | | | | te)* | | | | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | **S/N** | **A** | **B** | **C** | **D** | **E** | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | | **Categor | **Issue / | **Applica | **Respond | **Applica | | | y | reference | nt's | ent's | nt\'s | | | / | to | submissio | submissio | submissio | | | Request** | pleading | ns\*\*** | ns\*\*\** | ns | | | | / | | * | in reply | | | | affidavit | | | to | | | | \*** | | | responden | | | | | | | t's | | | | | | | submissio | | | | | | | ns** | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | **1.** | (E.g. | (E.g. |   |   |   | | | Minutes | Relevancy | | | | | | oi | , |   |   |   | | | | Privilege | | | | | | Meeting | ) | | | | | | of Board | | | | | | | of | (E.g. | | | | | | Directors | paragraph | | | | | | on 2 | s | | | | | | | 13 to 15 | | | | | | Jan 2021) | of the | | | | | | | Defence / | | | | | | | paragraph | | | | | | | s | | | | | | | 3 to 6 | | | | | | | and page | | | | | | | 32 of the | | | | | | | affidavit | | | | | | | of X | | | | | | | dated | | | | | | | dd/mm/yy) | | | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | **2.** |   |   |   |   |   | | | | | | | | | |   |   |   |   |   | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | **3.** |   |   |   |   |   | | | | | | | | | |   |   |   |   |   | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ Procedure? Always write to the other party at first instance FBP raised in SAPT (Order 9 Rule 9(3) and 9(4)(e)) 3. 4. Amendment of Pleadings (Only to OC proceedings) Under the purview of SAPT (Order 9 Rule 9(4)(f)) Amendment by written agreement between the parties 14 days before trial (ORder 9 Rule 14(5)) - Note that such an amendment may only be made not **[less than 14 days before commencement of the trial]** Amendment with Court\'s permission (Order 9 Rule 14(1)) Amendments will be allowed if the Court finds that these amendments enable the real question in controversy between the parties to be determined. The threshold is not very high but costs may need to be awarded for wasted work. ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- - Sheagar s/o T M Veloo v Belfield Interna\^onal (Hong Kong) Ltd \[2014\] 3 SLR 524 at \[116\]--\[119\] - - - - - - - - Review Publishing Co Ltd v Lee Hsien Loong \[2010\] 1 SLR 52 at \[113\]--\[114\] - - - - - - - Amendment after deadline expiry limited to certain circumstances (Order 9 Rule 14(4)) **[\[Limitation period\]]** **[First,]**is where this amendment is to correct the name of a party. 00:32:19 If that was a genuine mistake and it is not misleading as to the identity of the party question. 00:32:28 The **[second]** is where the amendment relates to altering the capacity in which the party sues. If, from the start, the party might have sued in that capacity anyway. 00:32:42 And **[third]** and that\'s something I will elaborate on a little bit more where the amendment is to add or substitute a new course of action if the new course of action ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- a. b. c. One must first determine whether the amendment will prejudice the other parties limitation defense and what does it mean by that? There are various types of amendments that can be made to pleadings. There are certain amendments which are amendments to correct clerical errors, correct typos, amendments to correct the names of the parties (). ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- - If everything arises from the same or **[substantially the same set of facts]** that has been pleaded right from the outset. There is no prejudice to the defendant. - - Amendments **[made less than 14 days before trial]** must show that the no prejudice not suffered by the other party **[\[High threshold]**\] You need to justify why you were not able to do so earlier. You need to show that there would be no prejudice caused to the defendant or **[how you\'re going to remedy that Prejudice]**. You need to show what is the prejudice that will be caused to yourself if you are not allowed to amend and the court will consider all of it and see if the very high threshold of a special case is met in these circumstances. ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- The court may take the view that the original certification of truth has some issue, or the court may take the view that this amendment, the material fact, may not be a true amendment, may be an afterthought, maybe something that is, you know, just just thought of later after the proceedings have. ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- Striking out **[Striking out falls within SAPT]** Permission is **[not required]** to file the application if the application is to strike out the **[entire action or defence]** (Order 9 Rule 9(7)(h)) Application to **[strike out part]** of an action or defence to be dealt with under the **[SAPT]**. (Order 9 Rule 9(4)(h)) **[Grounds for striking out (Order 9 Rule 16)]** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. a. b. c. - No reasonable cause of action (Gabriel Peter & Partners) (Order 9 Rule 16(1)(a)) - - Abuse of process (Gabriel Peter & Partners) (Order 9 Rule 16(1)(b)) - - - - - As long as the statement of claim discloses some cause of action, or **[raises some question fit to be decided at the trial]**, the mere fact that the case is weak and is not likely to succeed is no ground for striking it out. Where a statement of claim is defective only in not containing particulars to which the defendant is entitled, the application should be made for particulars under O 18 r 12 and not for an order to strike out the statement. ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- Leong Quee Ching Karen v Lim Soon Huat and ors \[2022\] SGHC 309 at \[23\] In the interest of justice (Order 9 Rule16(1)(c)) court to strike out pleadings when it is in the interests of justice to do so. The Judge agreed with the AG that this gives effect to the court's inherent jurisdiction to prevent injustice, such as where the claim is plainly or obviously unsustainable Proceedings are **[frivolous]** when they are **[deemed to waste the court's time, and are determined to be incapable of legally sustainable and reasoned argument]** Proceedings are **[vexatious]** when they are **[shown to be without foundation and/or where they cannot possibly succeed and/or where an action is brought only for annoyance or to gain some fanciful advantage.]** - - - - - - - Summary Judgement **[summary judgement falls outside of SAPT]** **[Only applicable to OC]** **[Permission is not required to file the application]** (Order 9 Rule 9(7)(g)) When should application for summary judgement be brought? (**[Order 9 Rule 17(1)]** and 17(13) - [ ] **After Defence served \< Application for summary judgement \< [28 days]**[)] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Applies also to a counterclaim -- ie, the defendant bringing a counterclaim may apply for summary judgment. see Order 9 Rule 17(11) to (13). Procedure: **[has to include all evidence that is necessary or material to the claim /counterclaim in the supporting affidavit]**: Principles **[Mere assertion, denial or dispute in the affidavit is not enough. The Applicant must show a prima facie case. The Respondent must show that there is a fair or reasonable probability that the Respondent has a real or bona fide defense.]** 1. 2. 3. 4. a. b. 1. **[Orders - Scenarios:]** ªDismiss the application. if fall below prima facie case ªGrant permission to defend without any conditions. because the issue cannot be dealt with summarily ªGrant judgment to the applicant. ªGrant permission to defend with conditions if the defence or any issue raised therein is of a dubious nature. The court is not convinced by the shaky defence. The payment into court of some form of security for the claim. The contrast this with security for cost security for cost relates to the amount of cost that is likely to be incurred or that is likely to be ordered at the end of the day. This condition usually relates to payment of security to secure the claim amount ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- Decisions on questions of law or construction of documents **Court may make a decision on a question or law or on construction of a document without a trial or hearing on the facts, whether or not the decision will fully determine the action [(Order 9 Rule 19)]** 1. 2. UOB v Lippo \[**[threshold requirements]**\] **The defendant has entered an appearance in the action; The parties have an opportunity of being heard on the question of law; The question of law is suitable for determination [without a full trial of the action]; and [Such determination will fully determine (subject only to any possible appeal) the entire cause or matter or any claim or issue therein].** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - Judgements on Admission Court may give judgments based on admissions (Order 9 Rule 18(2)) Mycitydeal Ltd (trading as Groupon UK) v Villas International Property Pte Ltd \[2014\] 4 SLR 1077 at \[69\] Third party and similar proceedings Objective: one set of hearings, lower costs Grounds (Order 10 Rule 1(1)) Form Order 10 Rule 1(1) read with Forms 20 and 21 of Appendix A to the Supreme Court PDs 2021. 1. 2. 3. a. b. i. ii. 4. When is permission required? (Order 10 Rule 1(2)) Procedure for applying for permission (Order 10 Rule 2) Service (Order 10 Rule 3(2)) Third party directions (Order 10 Rule 4) General (Order) for Production of documents Definition of what are \"documents\" in section 3 of the Evidence Act 1893. "document" includes, in addition to a document in writing --- (a) any map, plan, graph or drawing; (b) any photograph; (c) any label, marking or other writing which identifies or describes anything of which it forms a part, or to which it is attached by any means whatsoever; (d) any disc, tape, soundtrack or other device in which sounds or other data (not being visual images) are embodied so as to be capable (with or without the aid of some other equipment) of being reproduced therefrom; (e) any film (including microfilm), negative, tape, disc or other device in which one or more visual images are embodied so as to be capable (with or without the aid of some other equipment) of being reproduced therefrom; and (f) any paper or other material on which there are marks, impressions, figures, letters, symbols or perforations having a meaning for persons qualified to interpret them; **[Legal considerations for ordering Discovery of Electronic documents]** (d) the ease and expense of retrieval of any particular electronically stored document or class of electronically stored documents, including -- (i) the accessibility, location and likelihood of locating any relevant documents, (ii) the costs of recovering and giving discovery and inspection of any relevant documents, (iii) the likelihood that any relevant documents will be materially altered in the course of recovery, or the giving of discovery or inspection; and ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- Court\'s power (ORder 11 Rule 1) Factors considered: (i) a claimant is to sue and proceed on the strength of its case and not on the weakness of the defendant's case; and (ii) a party who sues or is sued in court does not thereby give up its right to privacy and confidentiality in the party's documents and communications. ­It will be in the interests of justice to allow a broader scope of discovery if such broader discovery could aid in disposing fairly of the proceedings: see Order 11 Rule 1(4). it\'s not a must that this order is made, but typically if AEICs are not ordered to be done before production of documents, **[typically there will be general production of documents before SAPT]** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Timeline (Order 11 Rule 2(1)): within 14 days from the order Scope of production (Order 11 Rule 2(1)(a)(b)(c)) All documents that the party in question will be **[relying]** on Order 11, Rule 2(1)(a) All known **[adverse]** documents Order 11, Rule 2(1)(b) Any **[other documents]** that come within the scope of any broader discovery that is **[agreed or ordered]** by the Court Order 11, Rule 2(1)(c) ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- **[Specific Documents]** may be ordered to be produced upon request (ORder 11 Rule 3(1)) Criteria: (i) **[properly identifies]** the requested documents; and (ii) shows that the requested documents are **[material to the issues in the case].** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Send a letter to the other party first Usually no specific production of documents until AEICs are exchanged (except special case) If the disclosing party refuese, then seek order from court General Power to order production (Order 11 Rule 4) **[Limitations on productions (Order 11 Rule 5)]** Unless it is a special case: No train of inquiry documents No private/internal correspondences (unless know adverse documents) ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- **[Production must be based on the strenght of C\'s case, not weakness of D\'s case (Order 11 Rule 1(2))]** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- **[Continuing duty to produce]**: see Order 11 Rule 6 of the ROC 2021 (note the timeline of 14 days after the document came into the party's possession or control). ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- **[Consequences of non-compliance]** with a production order: see Order 11 Rule 7 of the ROC 2021. **order that the action be dismissed or that the defence be struck out and judgment be entered accordingly; draw an adverse inference or make any such order as the Court deems fit; punish that party for contempt of court if the order has been served on that party's solicitor, but it is open to that party to show that that party was not notified or did not know about the order; or order that that party may not rely on any document that is within the scope of the order unless the Court approves.** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- a. b. c. d. Confidentiality is not a basis for withholding or objecting to production of documents: see Order 11 Rule 9 of the ROC 2021. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | \(1) A party who is required by any order made by the Court under | | this Order to produce documents **[may not withhold or object to | | the produc\^on] of any document on the ground that the | | document is confiden\^al.** | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | **(2) A confiden\^al document does not lose its confiden\^ality even | | if it was disclosed or taken inadvertently or unlawfully by anyone.** | | | |   | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ Restriction on the use of proceedings in other proceedings except with party consent or with the Court's approval: see Order 11 Rule 10(1) of the ROC 2021. ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | \(1) Any document produced under this Order or by compulsion of law | | in the court proceedings **must not be relied on in other | | proceedings by the other par\^es or non-par\^es unless the party | | who produced the document consents or the Court otherwise | | approves.** | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ |   | | | |   | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ The party who produced the document may **[apply for an order prohibiting the use of the documents for any purpose other than the case in which production was given]**: see Order 11 Rule 10(2) of the ROC 2021. ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Inspection of originals upon request: see Order 11 Rule 12 of the ROC 2021. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | **(1) If a party requests to inspect the original of any document | | produced, the party who produced the document must arrange a mutually | | convenient \^me and place for the inspec\^on to take place.** | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | \(2) Such inspec\^on **[must take place within 14 days a\^er the | | request unless the par\^es otherwise agree.]** | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | \(3) If the party who produced the document fails to comply with | | paragraph (1) or (2), **the reques\^ng party may apply to the Court | | to compel that party to do so.** | | | |   | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ Trial 1\. Pre-trial Preparation (Part IV of Syllabus) Setting down (Order 9 Rule 25(1)) O 9 r 25(4): time for setting down by claimant to be fixed O 9 r 25(6)-(8): form, content and service of Notice for Setting Down O 9 r 25(9) and para 102 of Supreme Court PD: further documents to be filed Para 99 of Supreme Court PD: filing of lead counsel's statement **[Witnesses evidence by AEIC]** (Order 15 Rule 16) "(1) As a general rule, the trial in an originating claim... must be decided on the basis of the witnesses' affidavits of evidence-in-chief, cross-examination, re-examination and on oral or written submissions. (2) In a special case, the Court may allow a witness' evidence-in-chief to be given orally instead of by affidavit of evidence-in-chief. (3) An affidavit of evidence-in-chief may not be used if the maker does not attend Court for cross-examination, unless the parties otherwise agree. (4) An affidavit of evidence-in-chief must contain all material facts which may not be departed from or supplemented by new facts in oral evidence unless the new facts occurred after the date of making the affidavit of evidence-in-chief." Simulataneous exchange of AEIC (O9 r8(1)) Objections to contents of AEIC (O15 r16(6) and Paragraph 84 Supreme Court PD) **[Expert Evidence]** (O12 r2) "(1) No expert evidence may be used in Court unless the Court approves. (2) The parties must consider whether expert evidence will contribute materially to the determination of any issue that relates to scientific, technical or other specialised knowledge and whether such issue can be resolved by an agreed statement of facts or by submissions based on mutually agreed materials. (3) The Court must not approve the use of expert evidence unless it will contribute materially to the determination of any issue in the case and the issue cannot be resolved in the manner stated in paragraph (2). (4) The Court may disallow the use of or reject any expert evidence if it is of the opinion that the expert lacks the requisite specialised knowledge in the issues referred to him or her or that he or she lacks impartiality". Duty of the Expert (O12 r1(2)-(3)) \(a) the complete instructions which were given to the expert; (b) a statement of facts leading to the expert's opinion; (c) the facts known by the expert to be true; (d) the facts which the expert was instructed to assume; and (e) the facts which the expert had assumed. +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | ~-~ | It is a requirement under O 40A r | | | 3(2)(c) of the Rules that **the | | | expert's report contains "a | | | statement se\^ng out the issues | | | which he has been asked to | | | consider and the basis upon which | | | the evidence was given". Form 58 | | | fleshes out the details that | | | should be provided, as follows:** | | | | | | **- (a) the complete instruc\^ons | | | which were given to the expert;** | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ - - - - 1.  **In such circumstances, the appellate court is entitled to undertake its own evaluation to determine whether the trial judge's inferential findings are justified by the facts. In an appropriate case, the appellate court is also entitled to examine the underlying facts to see whether there is any evidence to support the expert testimony in question.** - - - - - - - - as a matter of legal principle, **if an expert or an adjudicator has, prior to the relevant appointment, been recently approached by one of the directly-interested parties to give a professional opinion or adjudicate on a matter, the expert or adjudicator concerned ought to make this known as soon as practicable to the others involved in the appointment process.** - - - **[Witnesses]** Order to attend court or produce documents (O15 r4(1)) **[Riddick principle :] The courts should, therefore, not allow the other party -- or anyone else -- to use the documents for any ulterior or alien purpose. Otherwise, the court themselves would be doing injustice** ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- - - - - Pre-Trial Examination (O9 r24) Rule 24(1) allows a party to apply for the evidence of a witness in an action to be recorded at a pre-trial examination in circumstances where it may not be possible to obtain the witness's evidence at the trial of the action. **2. The Trial (Part V of Syllabus)** Attendance of witnesses at trial (O15 r16(3)) Evidence by video link s62A Evidence Act **The Court stated that [prejudice] is the overriding factor in considering an O 38 r 1 application and the Court had a duty to ensure that the proceedings were fair to both par\^es. One important consideration is if the other party would be [taken by surprise.]** - - - - - - - **The Court held that if [sufficient reason] was given as to why the actual physical presence of a foreign witness could not be effected, the court should [lean in favour of permi\^ng] video link evidence in lieu of the normal rule of physical tes\^mony.** If a witness is **[not normally a resident in Singapore]** then that itself may afford sufficient reason to grant the applica\^on to save costs - - - - - **his (the withness) [only reason for testifying by video link was that it was inconvenient to give evidence in Singapore as he worked in Shanghai and did not travel to Singapore often]. [This alone was not sufficient,] especially when considered against the fact that it is important that a witness give important evidence in person so that the proceedings are conducted fairly. Hence, the court did not grant leave for Mr Lee to testify by video link.** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (where the Court considered the witness' unwillingness to attend trial physically as a non-determinative factor relevant to the question of whether leave should be granted for him/her to testify via video link), - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - where an application was made for the giving of evidence via video-link arising out of COVID-19-related travel restrictions), - - - - - - - - - - - - - - where the court cautioned against blindly citing the pandemic as a reason as to why a witness is unable to testify physically at trial). - - - - - - - - - Order of proceedings Claimant\'s Opening Examination of Claimant\'s witnesses Witness preparation should not be training/ coaching (Ernest Ferdinand) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Examination Cross-Examination Re-examination Claimant\'s Closing Defendant states his/her case \"No case to Answer\" O15 r8(11) 11. a. b. c. d. e. Defendant\'s opening Examination of Defendant\'s witnesses Examination Cross-examination Re-examination Defendant\'s closing Claimant\'s closing ** Absence of party at trial** **[Only if both the defendant and counsel are absent may a default judgment be entered against the defendant. Similarly, if the plaintiff is absent but his counsel is present when an action is called on for hearing, the court cannot just dismiss the action but must allow the plaintiff's counsel to present his case and call witnesses if he has any in support. \[emphasis added\]]** **[If none of the parties attends Court when the trial begins]**, **the Court may dismiss the claim and any counterclaim.** **[If one of the parties does not attend Court when the trial begins]**, **the Court may proceed with the trial or give judgment against or dismiss the claim of the absent party or make any other appropriate order.** 3\. **[Interim Reliefs]** (Part VI of Syllabus) **[BEFORE Trial]** Potential interim measures a party may seek (Source of Court's power: s 4(10) Civil Law Act; s 18(2) and First Schedule (paragraph 5) SCJA; ss 31-32 State Courts Act): Interlocutory / interim injunctions (including Mareva injunction) (O13 r1(3)) Supporting affidavit explaining the urgency (Para 71 PD ) 1. 2. a. b. c. 3. Affidavit requirement (Para 73 PD) 1. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. 2. 3. Was there full and frank disclosure (Vasilly Golovin) - - - Procedure for urgent hearing (para 85 PD) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Principles for grant (American Cyan): (1) Was there a serious question to nbe trialled, (2) balance of convenience only considered if there is doubt as to the adequacy of damages - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mareva Injunction (Freezing order) O13 r1(6) &(7) Purpose: to prevent disspation of assets Procedure: 6. 7. 2. Note specific requirements in para 72 Supreme Court PD 2. 3. Ancillary orders Do not confuse with proprietary injunctions -- see eg Ernest Ferdinand v Compañía De Navegación Palomar, SA and others \[2020\] SGCA 24 at \[58\]-\[60\] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Principles for grant: **[(1) there is a valid cause of action over which the court has jurisdiction;] [(2) there is a good arguable case on the merits of the claimant's claim;] [(3) the defendant has assets within the jurisdiction; and] [(4) there is a real risk that the defendant will dissipate his assets to frustrate the]** ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - Detention, preservation and search orders; orders for the taking of samples Detention Order Detention and preservation orders: O 13 r 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Order 13, Rule 2] **(1) The Court may order the deten\^on, custody or preserva\^on of any property which is the subject** **ma\^er of or may give rise to issues in an ac\^on.** \(2) **The Court may order the inspec\^on of any such property in the possession or control of a party.** **(3) The Court may authorise any person to enter upon any immovable property in the possession or** **control of any party to effect any order made under paragraphs (1) and (2).** **(4) Where there is a dispute as to the right of any party to a specific fund, the Court may order the** **fund to be paid into Court or otherwise secured.** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Orders for taking of samples: O 13 r 3 1. a. b. 2. Was there any danger of destruction? (Tokio Marine) - - - - - - +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | **A danger of destruc\^on of |   | | exis\^ng evidence must be | | | shown.** |   | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | **The property must be in | | | existence during the \^me of the | | | applica\^on and applies only to** | | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | **physical items, not choses in | | | ac\^on.** | | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ - - - - Procedure: summons supported by affidavit Search Order (O13 r1) Principles of grant: Computerland Corp v Yew Seng Computers Pte Ltd \[1991\] 2 SLR(R) 379; - - - Bengawan Solo Pte Ltd v Season Confectionary Co Pte Ltd \[1994\] 1 SLR(R) 448; - - - - - - Asian Corp Services (SEA) Pte Ltd v Eastwest Management Ltd (Singapore Branch) \[2006\] 1 SLR(R) 901 - - - - - - - - - - Procedure: O 13 r 1 of ROC, para 73 of Supreme Court Practice Directions 1. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. 2. 3. Further Arguments **[General Division]** Para 81 of the State Court PD 1. 2. a. b. c. d. e. f. 3. 4. Statutory framework s29B SCJA 1. 2. a. b. 3. 4. a. i. ii. b. i. ii. Procedure O18 r28 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Para 112 Supreme Court PD 1. a. b. c. d. e. f. 2. 3. Appellate Division and Court of Appeal Finality of the court of appeal ▪No further arguments are to be made after: (i) the Court has heard the appeal and reserved its decision; and (ii) the Court has given its decision on appeal. ▪This applies unless the appellate Court otherwise directs. ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- O 18 r 38 and O 19 r 34 Reliance on further evidence **Further evidence could be admitted in further arguments if it was sought to be adduced in support of new arguments.** However, **where the further evidence was sought to support or strengthen previously raised arguments, that would not be permitted for it would be an abuse of process.** - - - 1. Appeals ▪Structure of the Rules of Court 2021 ("ROC 2021") Appeals Chapters. +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | **O18 - Appeals against | **O19 - Appeals against | | Interlocutory Applica\^ons** | Judgments/Orders** | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | - - - - - - - - - | - - - - - - - - | | | | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | [Divisions] | [Divisions] | | | | | - - - - - | - - - - | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ ▪General provisions and considerations applicable to all tiers of appeal. **[\[Applicable to all tiers]**\] ▪Is there a right of appeal? (s29 SCJA) No appeal against: Judgement/order is made by consent of the parties Order by judge made refusing further and better particulars order by judge giving permission to amend pleading Order by judge refusing security for costs Order by judge refusing interrogatories ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Flags  Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- -------------------------------------------------------------- a. 1. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. 11. j. k. l. 2. 3. 1. a. b. 2. a. b. ▪If so, is permission to appeal required and if so, from which Court should permission be obtained? (s29A SCJA) 1. a. b. c. 2. a. b. 1. 2. 1. 2. a. b. 3. a. b. c. d. e. i. ii. f. g. h. i. ii. i. j. k. l. i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. x. m. 4. 1. 2. 5. 1. a. b. i. ii. 2. a. b. ▪How does one commence an appeal or an application for permission to appeal? **Must file and serve on all parties who have an interest in the appeal a notice of appeal in Form 35 within 14 days after the date of the Registrar's decision.** O. 18 r. 17; 1. a. b. i. ii. 2. O. 18 r. 24; O. 18 r. 27; 1. a. b. 2. O. 19 r. 14; 1. 2. O. 19 r. 25. 1. a. b. 2. ▪How much **time** does one have to appeal? Court must determine all matters (including costs) before time starts to run (O19 r3) 1. 2. a. b. c. i. ii. i. ii. Court must determine all matters (including costs) before time starts to run (O19 r4) 1. 2. **[Appeal does not operate as a stay of enforcement]** : See Order 18, Rule 6 and Order 19, Rule 6 of ROC 2021. 1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 3. **[Expedited appeal]**: See Order 18, Rule 11 and Order 19, Rule 9 of ROC 2021 ▪ Applies where the appeal is urgent or where there is a special reason. ▪ May be ordered on an application by a party or on the court's own accord. ▪ May be directed by both the lower Court or the appellate Court. 1. 2. 1. 2. **[Appeals between different courts]** ▪Appeals from decisions made in the **[State Courts.]** Governed by O18 \(I) From State Ct Registrar to DJ Governed by: Order 18 Div 2 Time for appealing and how to appeal: 14 days; Notice of Appeal in Form 35 -- see O. 18 r. 15 Documentation and Timelines: 35 page written submissions and bundles of authorities. 14 or 28 days from the prescribed events -- see O. 18 r. 16(5). \(II) From DJ/Mag hearing any application, OA or DJ hearing appeal from State Ct Registrar to GDHC Governed by: Order 18 Div 3. Time for appealing and how to appeal: 14 days; Notice of Appeal in Form 35 -- see O. 18 r. 17 Need \$3,000 or \$5,000 in security for costs -- see O. 18 r. 20 Documentation and Timelines Same as for State Ct Registrar to DJ -- see O. 18 r. 21 Governed by O19 \(III) From DJ/Mag hearing trial of an OC, assessment/account or committal to GDHC Governed by: Order 19 Div 2 Time for appealing and how to appeal: 14 days; Notice of Appeal in Form 35 -- see O. 19 r. 14 Need \$3,000 or \$5,000 in security for costs -- see O. 19 r. Documentation and Timelines: ▪Appeals against decisions of the **[Registrar of the Supreme Court.]** ▪Appeals from the General Division of the High Court ("GDHC") to the Appellate Division of the High Court ("ADHC") and the Court of Appeal ("CA"). GDHC TO ADHC OR CA: O. 18 DIV. 5 Scope of Order 18 Div. 5 Process for permission to appeal Process for appeal GDHC TO ADHC OR CA: O. 19 DIV. 3 Scope of Order 19 Div. 3 Process for permission to appeal Process for appeal O19 r30-32 ▪Appeals from the ADHC to the CA. Grounds Wrong filing More appropriate Issues on appeal Means of transferring CA\'s own motion on all 3 grounds By CA on a reference by ADHC on all 3 grounds By CA on an application by a party but only on the \"wrong filing\" ground or the \"more appropriate\" ground Procedure (for applications) Timeline for an application under the "wrong filing" ground: Timeline for an application under the "more appropriate" ground: Procedure for applications to transfer Transfer from CA to ADHC Grounds Wrong filing: Appeal was not made to the CA in accordance with s 29C SCJA Issues on appeal do not engage 6th Schedule: Issues on appeal in relation to 6th Schedule matters relate to issues of settled law: Means of transferring By the CA on the CA's own motion on all 3 grounds By the CA on an application by a party but only on the "wrong filing" ground Procedure (for applications) Timeline for an application under the "wrong filing" ground: Procedure for applications to transfer: ADHC transfer to CA Note the restrictions on a further appeal from the ADHC to the CA If permission is required, note the procedure for seeking permission: If permission is obtained and an appeal is to be filed, note the papers that are to be filed Other issues: Applications (In General) Note that additional/ special requirements apply to applications for permission to appeal -- see O. 18 r. 29/ O. 19 r. 26 ------- ---------------------------------------- Flags Risk; \[\"mmStockIconFlagRed\", \"\"\] ------- ---------------------------------------- **[Other issues: fresh evidence]** See sections 41(4)--(5) and 59(4)--(5) of the SCJA and Order 18 Rule 8(6) and Order 19 Rule 7(7) of the Rules of Court 2021 (see the test of "special grounds"). **BNX v BOE conditions: First, [ascertain what the relevant matters were, of which evidence was sought to be given,] and [ensure that these were matters that occurred after the trial\* or hearing below;]** **Second, [satisfy itself that the evidence of these matters was at least potentially material to the issues in the appeal;] and** **Third, [satisfy itself that the material at least appeared to be credible.]** - - - - - - 1. 2. 3. Ladd Marshall conditions: firstly, It must be shown that the evidence could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use at the trial; Secondly, the evidence must be such that, if given, it would probably have an important influence on the result of the case -- thought it need not be decisive; Thirdly, The evidence must be apparently credible, though it need not be incontrovertible Anan Group (Singapore) Notwithstanding not meeting Ladd Marshall requirements, the court still could admit fresh evidence: First, where new evidence revealed fraud perpetrated on the court below; Second, where a party was prevented from adducing fresh evidence during the hearing below in circumstances akin to denial of natural justice; Third, where the subject ma\^er of the dispute was such that the stakes were particularly high or where there was a greater public interest involved, such as in child welfare or criminal proceedings. Anan Group Two -step analysis: **First, [the court should consider the nature of the proceedings below] and [evaluate the extent to which it bore the characteristics of a full trial. ]** **Second, [the court should determine whether there were any other reasons for which the Ladd v Marshall requirements ought to be relaxed in the interests of justice,] with reference to the three categories set out above** - - - - - - - - - - Enforcement of Court Orders General Rule: **[A court order takes effect from its date, and the filing of an appeal would not operate automatically to stay enforcement]** O22 r13 Examination of Enforcement Respondent (\"EER\") Note Burgundy Global Exploration Corp v Transocean Offshore Intl Ventures Ltd \[2014\] 3 SLR 381 at \[110\]-\[115\]: the Court's **[permission]** is required before an EER order may be served abroad a foreign officer of the enforcement respondent entity Note also the effect of O 22 r 11(4); an order staying enforcement of a court order would also stay EER proceedings (c.f., the previous position in PT Bakrie Investindo v Global Distressed Alpha Fund 1 \[2013\] 4 SLR 1116) Consolidated procedure (O22 r2) No later than 3 days after the Court order (O 22 r 2(3)-(4)) Enfrocement Order is valid for 12 months ( O 22 r 2(5)-(6)) (O22 r6) Right of Respondent to object (O22 r10) Costs 1\. Two points concerning nomenclature What is \'contenious business\'? means business done in or for the purposes of proceedings begun before a court of justice or before an arbitrator O21 r1(2) What is Solicitor-and-Client versus Part-and-party costs s112(2) LPA Principle: **full recovery of legal costs by the successful party is the exception rather than the norm.** - - - 2\. Entitlement to costs (who pays whose costs?) Basis of entitlement - either by contract provision or judgement/ court order - - \[3\] **[Judgment or Court order is required before a party may recover costs]** (O21 r3(1)) Timing O21 r2(4) Costs orders: default position and departures from the general rule **[Costs follow the event]** (O21 r3(2)) an award of costs will generally flow with the result of litigation; the successful party being entitled to an order for costs against the unsuccessful party What is the \'event\'? (Alfro-Asia Shipping ) "The event" is construed pragmatically; When to depart from \'costs follow the event?\' (O21 r4) (a) that party has failed to establish any claim or issue which that party has raised in any proceedings, [thereby unnecessarily increasing the amount of time taken, the costs or the complexity of the proceedings]; (b) that party [has done or omitted to do anything unreasonably;] (c) that party [has not discharged that party's duty to consider amicable resolution of the dispute or to make an offer of amicable resolution in accordance with Order 5]; or (d) that party [has failed to comply with any order of court, any relevant pre- action protocol or any practice direction]." Tullio Planeta v Maoro Andrew G \[1994\] 2 SLR(R) 501 at \[23\]-\[24\]: O 21 r 3(3) ROC: Amendment application O 21 r 3(4) ROC: Extension of time application 3\. Quantum of costs Fixed costs vs Taxed costs Standard basis vs Indemnity basis **Indemnity costs are awarded only exceptionally;** see Raffles Town Club Pte Ltd v Lim Eng Hock Peter \[2011\] 1 SLR 582 at \[32\]: Tan Chin Yew Joseph v Saxo Capital Markets \[2013\] SGHC 274 at \[97\]-\[100\] Assessment of costs (O21 r28(1)) Bill of costs (O21 r20) **[Quantification principles (O21 r2(2))]** Section 1: Legal costs (O21 r2(2)) Lin Jian Wei and anor v Lim Eng Hock Peter \[2011\] SLR 1052 at \[27\]-\[30\], \[34\]-\[58\], \[78\] - - - - - - - - - - - - Section 2: Assessment costs (O21 r13(1)) Section 3 Costs (disbursements) Claimable scope:**the word "disbursement" was wide enough to also include loans or debts properly incurred by a party for the purposes of litigation, provided that it was proven that these loans or debts were due and payable and would be paid after taxatioon.** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa and others* \[2008\] 3 SLR(R) 189 at \[7\], \[10\]--\[11\] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For taxa\^on, **the general rule should be that disbursements claimed should be expenses that had been paid**. However, **the word "disbursement" was wide enough to also include loans or debts properly incurred by a party for the purposes of li\^ga\^on, provided that it was proven that these loans or debts were due and payable and would be paid a\^er taxa\^on.** Such a construc\^on of "disbursement" was sensible, for **if the word was limited strictly to only actual expenses paid out by a party, a poor but successful li\^gant might be denied recovery of what should be his or her righ\^ul amount of costs**. However, **evidence such as invoices or bills must be tendered to prove this to the court's sa\^sfac\^on, before these loans or debts could be recovered as disbursements in taxa\^on.** **As this was not done, the AR's decision was affirmed** **Air miles could be a proper disbursement that could be recovered in taxa\^on**. **There was no reason why a plain\^ff who paid for an airplane \^cket should be be\^er off (in taxa\^on) than one who decided to redeem an airplane \^cket using his or her air miles for whatever reason (be it that he or she was out of funds at the material \^me or just wanted to save some money).** However, during the hearing of the review, it transpired that the air miles used to redeem the air \^cket, although belonging in name to the plain\^ff, were accumulated through the use of the supplementary card given by Norman to the plain\^ff. In consequence, Item 110 was not allowed: at [\[7\]]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------