CIV 2 - SAPT (PDF)

00:00 Next, let\'s turn to consider the single application pending trial or SAPT. The SAPT is a consolidated application that is to contain as components within the SAPT each and every pretrial application the filing party wishes to pursue leading up to the trial. You can think of the SAPT as an om...

00:00 Next, let\'s turn to consider the single application pending trial or SAPT. The SAPT is a consolidated application that is to contain as components within the SAPT each and every pretrial application the filing party wishes to pursue leading up to the trial. You can think of the SAPT as an omnibus or umbrella application which has within it or under it several individual components. 00:30 applications. 00:38 The first point to consider is when the court will order the filing of a SEPT. For that, see Order 9, Rule 9.1. The court will address its mind to the filing of a SEPT after the filing of the evidence of evidence in chief before the production of documents, or if the court decides that the case is not a suitable one for ordering the filing of AICs before document production. 01:06 that is the stage at which the court will consider the filing of the SAPT. So next let\'s look at the purpose of the SAPT. The purpose is stated in Order 9, Rule 9, 1 as well. The SAPT is meant to serve as an occasion for the court to consider all matters necessary to bring the proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with the ideals. The ideals, just to recap, are stated in Order 3, Rule 1. 01:36 of the Rules of Court 2021. Those ideals include fair access to justice, expeditious proceedings, cost-effective work proportionate to the nature and importance of the action, the complexity of the claim, as well as the difficulty or novelty of the issues and questions it raises, and the amount of value of the claim and so on. You can read that provision again for yourself. Order 3, Rule 1. 02:04 As for the applications that are to be made within the SAPT, please read Order 9, Rule 9.3 and Order 9, Rule 9.4. 02:14 Rule 9.3 tells us that the SAPT must deal with all matters that are necessary for the case to proceed expeditiously. Then Rule 9.4 sets out a non-exhaustive list of applications that are to be filed within the SAPT. It is a non-exhaustive list because you will see that Order 9, Rule 9.4 states that the list set out there includes the listed matters. I won\'t read out all of the listed matters in Order Rule 9. 02:42 or the 9 rule 9-4. But just to give you an illustration, the list includes applications to add or remove parties, applications to consolidate actions, applications to divide issues at the trial, and applications for security for costs and so on. 03:00 We will consider the processes for each of these applications in greater detail later on in this lecture. For now, just note that the applications listed in Rule 9.4 or which otherwise come within the general description in Rule 9.3 are to be filed as part of the SAPT. I shall also mention that there is a carve-out list of applications which need not necessarily be brought as part of the SAPT. 03:26 We\'ll consider the carve out list further in a few slides down. 03:39 An important point to note is that while a single application is to be filed, encompassing as individual components the whole range of pretrial applications the party wishes to pursue, it is not contemplated that every single component of the single application will be heard and decided in a single hearing. The court will decide on the sequence in which the individual component applications are to be heard and decided. 04:05 To allow the court to decide which component is to be heard first and which gets heard second and so on, other parties are required to file a document known as a SAPT checklist. The requirement for the completion and filing of the SAPT checklist is set out in the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021. 04:24 The relevant paragraphs are quoted on the slide and in the detailed syllabus. Please read the provisions carefully together with the sample checklist that you can find in Form B8 to Appendix B of the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021. I will outline the required steps very briefly. The directions to complete the SAPT checklist will come at least two weeks before case conference at which the issue of the filing of the SAPT will be discussed. 04:53 For convenience, I prefer to this case conference as the relevant RCC. You need at least two weeks lead time because the checklist has to be filled out in a particular sequence that is laid out in paragraph 56.13 of the practice directions 2021. 05:20 On this page, I have extracted a screenshot of part of form B8. Paragraph 5613 tells us that the party applying for the SAPT is to complete columns A, B, and C. First, column A, as you can see, is just a serial number. Column B sets out each component or matter in the SAPT the applicant wishes to pursue. 05:47 In the sample in Form B8, you can see the applicant wishes to pursue security for cost at CIO No. 1, an amendment of the defence at CIO No. 2 and so on. Column C sets out the applying parties proposed sequence in which the matters are to be heard. The applicant here wants security for cost to be heard first. Thereafter the applicant proposes the court here an application to amend the defence. 06:18 further embedded particulars and a striking out together at one hearing, then production of documents followed finally by a division of officials at trial to be heard at a separate hearing. Don\'t worry for the moment, by the way, about what each of these matters means. We\'ll cover them later in this lecture. So after completing columns A, B and C, the form is to be served on the responding party. 06:45 The parties are then supposed to confirm the applicant\'s preferred sequence. If the parties are able to agree on the sequence, column D is to be completed, accordingly to mirror the applicant\'s sequence. If the parties do not agree, which is the case in the example set out on the screen, the responding party is to fill in its proposed sequence. So in the sample in form B8, the responding party agrees that security for costs should be heard first. 07:14 So the second application, though the responding party disagrees, the responding party thinks that the second application should be the striking on application. 07:25 thereafter the responding party proposes that the amendment application and the further and better particulars application are to be heard together in one hearing. Next in sequence, the responding party\'s position is that the production application should be heard next. Finally, the division of issues at trial is to be heard at a separate hearing. 07:47 If there is disagreement on the sequence, the reasons for each party\'s positions are to be stated in the SAPT checklist, as you can see on the slide. 08:06 Next, once the SAPT checklist is fully completed, the responding party is to file the completed SAPT checklist at least one week before the relevant RCC. At the relevant RCC, the court will look at the SAPT checklist and then issue directions both for the filing of the SAPT and also the sequence in which the components or matters within the umbrella of the SAPT are to be heard. 08:35 having regard to the party\'s positions as indicated on the SAPT checklist. In terms of the timelines for the filing of the SAPT, please see Order 9, Rule 9.5. Rule 9.5 tells us that the applying party will have 21 days from the relevant case conference at which directions are given. The opposing party will then have 21 days. 09:04 to file an affidavit in reply. Rule 96 also tells us that the court may order within submission supported by a bundle of authorities. 09:25 So next, a final set of points relating to the SAPT. First, on the carve-out list of applications that may be brought outside of the SAPT platform, which was mentioned a short while ago, the rules contained a set of carve-out applications that may be filed outside of the SAPT process without the court\'s prior permission. 09:47 This carve out list is set out in Order 9, Rule 97. It\'s quite a long list. The list includes applications for, such as an application for an injunction, substituted service, service out of Singapore, and so on. If you read the list carefully, you\'ll be able to figure out the rationale for why these applications are set out as carve outs. Just to give you an illustration of the rationale, take for example item B on the page. 10:15 an application for substituted service. As we learned in the first lecture, service is the process by which the claimant brings the originating process to the notice of the other party. Substituted service is a process by which a claimant can obtain court\'s permission to serve the originating process in a particular manner where it would be impracticable to comply with the rules on personal service. For example, the defendant may be evading service. 10:44 You can see that it would be impossible really to wait until the SAPT stage before you apply for substituted service, since you need to serve the proceedings before the case progresses beyond the issuance of the originating process. So if your matter falls within the list of carve-outs in Order 9, Rule 97, remember you don\'t need to wait for the SAPT before you file the application. You can just go ahead and file the application by yourself. 11:14 obtaining prior approval from the court. 11:24 Next, on the other hand, if your application is not within the list of carve-outs, and if you want to file the application earlier than the SAPT, in other words, prematurely or conversely after the SAPT has already been filed, in other words, if you missed the SAPT boat and if you want to file an application late, you need to first obtain the court\'s permission. 11:48 So if you are either too early for the SAPT or too late for the SAPT, and if your application is not within the carve-out list in Rule 97, you need to first obtain the court\'s permission before you file your application. 12:02 The procedure for seeking permission is set out in Order 9, Rule 98 and Rule 99. Essentially, the rules say that you just write a letter to the court to set out the essence of the intended application and why you need to file the application at that stage of the proceedings. The court will then consider your request and deal with it summarily, or the court may fix a case conference to discuss with you and the other parties further before deciding whether to grant permission. 12:32 Please note that while the rules say that you may write a letter, there is actually a form that you need to follow for making a request. This is stated in the Practice Directions 2021 at paragraph 66.6. Form in question is Form B9. I will leave it to you to look up the form by yourself. An important point to note is that there is a prohibition on filing applications late shortly before the start of the trial. 12:58 The prohibition is stated in Order 9, Rule 910 and Rule 911. Essentially, in the 14 days before the start of the trial and for the entire duration of the trial ending with the court\'s decision on the merits, you cannot file a pre-trial application. This is not an absolute prohibition. You can file an application within the prohibited period if you show that your matter is a special case and if you obtain the permission of the trial judge. 13:27 The permission cannot be granted by the registrar. It must be obtained from the trial judge. As for how you obtain permission during the prohibited period, Rule 9.11 tells you that you obtain approval from the trial judge by letter setting out the essence of the intended application and the reasons why there is a special case. You need to make your request by a form, though, Form B.9. This concludes the segment on the single application pending trial. 14:06 Now let\'s consider the process of adding and removing parties to the proceedings. 14:19 The first point to note is that applications to add or remove parties come within the list of matters that should be filed as part of the SAPT. So if you start your action against one defendant and later realize that you should also name another person as a second defendant, you should include that application for permission to add the second defendant as one of your components in your 14:45 Similarly, if you want to remove someone as a party to the case for any reason, you should do that as part of your SAPT. The actual provision that states that the court may grant you permission to add a person as a party or remove a person as a party is Order 9, Rule 10. The provision itself does not state the conditions that the court will apply in deciding whether a person should be added as a party or removed as one. 15:11 under the old rules that were provisioned set out within the rules on the conditions for joining a person as a party. You will have to see what principles developed in the case law under the new rules on when a party may be joined, bearing in mind the ideals. For the purposes of your syllabus though, just be aware that there is an avenue for applying to join parties and to remove them, and that the relevant rule to look at is Order 15:38 Also note that Order 9, Rule 10.2 tells us that the person who is sought to be added as a party may attend a case conference if the party is aware of the case conference, or it may even ask for a case conference by writing to the court. Finally, Rule 10.3 tells us that when a person is added as a defendant, the action is considered as commenced as against the defendant from the date on which the amendment to the action is made. 16:13 Next we will consider an important rule that empowers the court to deal with multiple lawsuits that are related in some way. The ruling question allows the multiple actions to be consolidated, in other words amalgamated into a single action. The rule also allows the actions to be heard together in a joint trial without the actions being combined into a single action. 16:37 A joint trial means that the related actions are heard at the trial in the same sitting before the same judge. Another option is for the trials of the related matters to be heard consecutively, meaning one after the other. Yet another option for managing multiplicity of related actions is for one or more matters to be stayed pending the resolution of another action. 17:08 The first point to note again is that such applications to consolidate matters or to have them heard in a joint trial or one after the other come within the list of matters that should be filed as part of the SAPT. So if you start your action and if there are related actions which should be managed and heard with your matter in some orderly fashion, you should include your application within the SAPT. 17:33 The provision that empowers the Court to order a consolidation, a joint trial, consecutive trials, or for one matter to be stayed while a related matter is heard, is Order 9, Rule 11. It is a rather broadly worded provision. The Court is empowered to order consolidation, a joint trial, consecutive trials, or a stay if one of the three conditions are met. If you meet one of the three conditions, the Court may make an order under Rule 11. I\'ll leave you to read up. 18:02 those three conditions for yourself. 18:13 Next we will consider an application for security for costs. This refers to an application that the defendant can take out to obtain some security to cover the costs that the claimant may be ordered to pay the defendant if the claimant eventually loses at trial. 18:31 The idea behind security for costs is to give the defendant who has been dragged into court to defend the claim some assurance that he will be able to recover some of his costs if the claimant loses at trial. 18:52 The first point to note again is that such applications for security for costs come within the list of matters that should be filed as part of the SAPT. Next, the provision that empowers the court to order security for costs is Order 9, Rule 12, which you should read carefully. There are also other statutes that allow for applications for security for costs. The syllabus refers you to Section 388 of the Companies Act. 19:18 which empowers the court to order security for costs against a company. The case law under the old rules which are cited in your syllabus states that there are two stages to the analysis. This two-stage process also arguably applies under the new rules. The two-stage process entails first the court considering whether there is jurisdiction to order security. 19:39 and at the second stage the court considers whether as a matter of discretion, security should be ordered. To establish that the court has jurisdiction to order security, you need to show that one of the three grounds listed in Order 9, Rule 12.1 are satisfied. The three grounds are listed on the slide. Let\'s read them out. One of them is that the claimant is ordinarily resident out of jurisdiction. The ground is very of the nominal claimant. 20:06 Third, whether the claimant has not stated or is incorrectly stated the claimant\'s address in the originating process or has changed his address during the course of the proceedings to evade the consequences of litigation. So essentially as a threshold requirement, you need to first fit yourself within one of the grounds before you can apply for security as the defendant. 20:29 If you satisfy the court that you meet one of the grounds for applying for security, the next stage of the analysis is whether the court should, in its discretion, order security. For that, we have to look at the case law cited in the syllabus. You will see the case as saying that the court will look at all relevant circumstances, such as the strength or weakness of the claimant\'s claim, as well as the ease of enforcing a Singapore judgment in the jurisdiction where the claimant is based. 20:57 When you read the cases, please bear in mind that the cases were decided under the old rules. The principles may well be applied differently in view of the ideals stated in the new rules of court 2021. The final point to note is that the rules state that references in Rule 12 to claimant and defendant are to be construed as references to persons in the positions of those persons in the proceedings. What this means is that in a counterclaim, 21:23 the defendant who is pursuing the counterclaim stands in the position of the claimant for the purposes of security for costs and the claimant stands in the position of the defendant. Thus, if the defendant is counterclaiming against the claimant, the claimant may apply for security for costs in relation to the counterclaim from the defendant. This may sound a little confusing but it is logical if you think about it carefully. In a counterclaim, the claimant is the one who is being positively sued. 21:53 that it is only fair that the claimant should have an avenue for securing his costs in defending the counsel claim if the grounds for security are satisfied and that the court considers in its discretion that ordering security is fair and just. 22:17 Next, let\'s turn to further and better particulars, which is an application you can file to get further particulars of the allegations made in the pleadings, in other words, the statement of claim, the defence, the reply and so on. 22:39 The first point to note again is that such applications for further and better particulars come within the list of matters that should be filed as part of the SAPT. The provision that empowers the Court to order further and better particulars is Order 9, Rule 13. You will see that it is a concise provision. 23:04 particulars of any matter stated in the first mentioned party\'s pleadings if the court is of the opinion that particulars are necessary on the facts of the case. The standard is set at necessity. There are also cases cited in the detailed syllabus on when particulars will be ordered by the court. Please read them bearing in mind again that the cases were decided under the old rules. 23:26 Those cases essentially say the particulars will be ordered if it can be shown that you need to have the particulars in order to prepare your case properly for the trial of the action. But please read the case with the caveat that I have mentioned. Please also note that there is a requirement to complete and file a summary table if you have more than five categories or subcategories of requests. So please do read paragraph 68 of the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021. 23:54 together with the form for the summary table which is form B10. If the number of your requests exceed the stated threshold of five categories or subcategories. 24:15 Next, we will consider how you should go about amending your pleadings. This is a process for you to amend your Statement of Claim, your defence, your reply and so on to correct errors or to add more points or to remove points that are pleaded. 24:37 The first point you should note is that applications for permission to amend pleadings come within the list of matters that should be filed as part of the SAPT. Broadly, there are two ways of amending your pleadings. The first is by written agreement between the parties. If you are able to secure an agreement, you may amend your pleadings without prior permission from the court, subject to an important restriction. The restriction is that you cannot amend your pleadings even with the agreement of the other parties. 25:05 if you are less than 14 days away from the trial of the action. If you are unable to secure the written agreement of the other parties or if you are less than 14 days from the date of the trial, you will need to follow the second way of amending your pleadings. The second way is to apply to the court for permission to amend your pleadings. You should note though that under the second route of amending with the court\'s permission, if you are less than 14 days from the start of the trial, 25:33 you will need to show that your matter is a special case. So please read in this regard, order 9, rule 14.3. As for the principles that the court will apply deciding whether to grant permission, there are two cases mentioned on the slides and the detailed syllabus which discuss the general principles. Please read them carefully with the caveat that the cases were decided under the old rules of court. 26:00 You will see from the cases that the Court has the power to allow an amendment to be made at any stage, including when the case is on appeal. The cases also say that the Court will allow amendments that enable the real issues to be decided between the parties, provided that the other side will not suffer any prejudice that cannot be compensated by an appropriate order as to costs. But you should read the cases to get a fuller statement of the applicable principles. 26:28 There are special considerations that apply where you are seeking permission to amend to include a matter in your pleadings after the relevant limitation period has expired. 26:38 For the special considerations, please read Order 9, Rule 14.2 and the case mentioned on the slide. I will leave it to you to read the provision of the case, again with the same caveat that was decided under the old Rules of Court. Essentially, you must show that your amendment comes within one of the three sub-categories set out in Order 9, Rule 14.4. 27:14 consider striking out. 27:25 Striking out refers to an application that both the claimant and the defendant may bring in appropriate circumstances to strike out either the claimant\'s pleadings or the defendant\'s pleadings. If you are the defendant and you are able to strike out all of the plaintiff\'s claimant\'s pleadings, then you would also ask that the entire action be dismissed. Conversely, if you are the claimant and you are able to strike out the entire defence, you would ask for judgment to be entered on your claim. 27:53 The first point to note is that if you\'re applying to strike out part of the other side\'s case, you\'ll have to bring that application as part of the single application pending trial. On the other hand, if you\'re applying to strike out the entire case of the other side, that is an application that falls within the carve-out list we discussed earlier. So for such an application, you do not need to wait until the SAPT can go ahead and file the application without the court\'s prior approval. 28:22 Next, let\'s consider the grounds for striking out. You will see on this slide under the new Rules of Court 2021, there are three grounds. As a comparison, under the old rules, there were five grounds for striking out. Let\'s start with the first ground. You can strike out a pleading if the pleading discloses no reasonable course of action. This was also a ground for striking out under the old Rules of Court 2014. For what this ground means, you should read the Gabriel Peter case that is cited in the detailed syllabus. 28:52 The Siking English case law tells us that a reasonable course of action refers to one which has some chance of success when only the allegations in the pleadings are considered. In other words, to test this whether the claimant has some chance of succeeding in his claim if he were to read only the pleadings and nothing else. Do bear in mind that the case was decided under the old rules, so read the case with that caveat in mind. 29:18 We also see in Order 9, Rule 16.2 that there is an express prohibition in the Rules of Court 2021 of the Court considering evidence if you are relying on the first ground of striking out. So the Court is supposed to only look at the pleadings when considering the first ground. As for background, the same restriction was also present under the old Rules of Court 2014. 29:43 The second ground refers to pleadings that are an abuse of process of the court. This was also a ground under the old rules of court 2014. You can see from the Gabriel Peter case that the courts have given that phrase a wide interpretation. One example of abuse of process is where a claim is brought for an ulterior or collateral purpose. It is also a helpful categorization of abuse of process. 30:08 in the High Court\'s decision in Chi Siok Chin and Minister for Home Affairs that you should read. Citation for that case is in your detailed syllabus and again, read all these cases with the caveat that they were decided under the old rules of court. The last ground for striking out is where it is in the interest of justice for there to be a striking out. This ground as framed was not present in the old rules of court. 30:33 Though under the old rules, there was a general inherent power to strike out under the old rules. We will have to see how the courts interpret this new ground. 30:52 Next, we will consider applications for summary judgment. 31:02 An application for a summary judgement is a summary process that the claimant may use to obtain judgement at an early stage, in clear cases where the claimant can show that there isn\'t really a defence to the claims. This summary process applies equally to counterclaims brought by the defendant against the claimant. If there isn\'t a real defence to the counterclaim, the defendant can rely on the summary judgement process to obtain a quick judgement on the counterclaim. 31:33 Let\'s begin with a preliminary point. You do not need the Court\'s permission before you file an application for summary judgement. An application for summary judgement falls into the carve-out list of applications that you may file without permission and outside of the single application pending trial. Next, the provision to look at for the rules governing applications for summary judgement is Order 9, Rule 17 of Rules of Court 2021. 32:03 first point to note is that you need to wait for the defence to be filed before you file your application for summary judgement. The rationale for this is that you need to first give the defendant an opportunity to set out his defence to the claims. So the earliest you can file the application is once the defence has been filed. There\'s also an alter limit. The latest that you can file the application is 28 days after the date of service. 32:32 of the defence or the defence to counterclaim, where the defendant is applying for summary judgement on the counterclaim. It should not be difficult to imagine the rationale for a time limit. If the claimant or the defendant pursuing a counterclaim considers that there is really no defence to the claim or counterclaim, as the case may be, the summary process of obtaining a summary judgement should be triggered quickly before the parties and the court spend further time. 33:01 and resources on the subsequent stages of the litigation. 33:14 Next, let\'s look at the procedure that applies where you wish to or where you apply for summary judgment. There are several sub-rules that you need to know and I\'ve set out the sub-rules on the slide. First, the party applying for summary judgment has to ensure that its affidavit in support of the application contains all the evidence that is necessary, all material to the claim or counterclaim, as the case may be. Second, the party responding to the application 33:43 then has 14 days to file and serve an affidavit if it is disputing the application for summary judgment in any way. That party\'s affidavit must contain all evidence that is necessary or material to the defence to the claim or the defence to the counterclaim, as the case may be. Third, within 14 days after service of the responding party\'s affidavit, the applying party may file a further affidavit. 34:12 Thereafter, no further affidavits may be filed without the court\'s permission. Thus the procedure essentially entails one round of affidavits and then a reply by the party applying for summary judgement. 34:33 The principles the Court will apply in determining whether to grant summary judgement are very well established. The starting point is that the party seeking summary judgement has to show a prima facie case for summary judgement. If the party seeking judgement is unable to even read that standard, then the application will be dismissed. If the party seeking judgement is able to show a prima facie case, the burden then shifts to the other party. The other party has to show 35:02 there is a triable issue or question, or that a trial should be held for some other reason. A mere assertion or denial in an affidavit by the other party will not suffice to show a triable issue. The other party has to show, and the court has to assess, whether the issue is triable. The relevant cases adding out these principles are mentioned in your syllabus. 35:29 Please read them with the caveat that they were decided under the old rules of law. 35:41 Just one final point before we close this section on an application for summary judgement. You need to know that there is a range of orders that the court may make on an application for summary judgement. It is not a binary choice of granting or dismissing the application. The options for the court are outlined on the slides. The court may, of course, dismiss the application. The court may also grant permission to defend without conditions. 36:08 that means that the case proceeds onwards towards a trial. The case law under the old rules tells us that this is the appropriate order where the applicant is able to show a prima facie case, the responding party is then able to show a tribal issue or that a trial is appropriate for another reason. The third option for the court is to grant the application, grant the applicant the summary judgment that it seeks. 36:36 The fourth option is to grant the respondent permission to defend, but with conditions attached. What this essentially means is that the respondent can have a trial, provided that the conditions set by the court are met by the respondent. This fourth option may be used where the defence, or any issue raised in the defence, is of a dubious nature. The words dubious nature are 37:06 D for Denmark. The rules do not specify any limitations to the conditions that may be attached. A common condition that parties ask for is for the respondent to provide security for the applicant\'s claim in some manner, for example by paying the claimed amount or part of the claimed amount into the court pending the resolution of the dispute. Finally, please note that where there is a claim and counterclaim, and if summary judgement is entered on the claim, 37:36 The court may order that the enforcement of the judgment on the claim should be stayed until the counterclaim is resolved. The same rule applies in the opposite scenario, in other words, where summary judgment is obtained on the counterclaim, but the claim proceeds to a trial. If there is a stay of enforcement, what that means is that the party receiving the judgment or the party having the benefit of the judgment is precluded from taking steps to obtain a 38:05 payment on the judgment. We will cover in a later lecture the steps that a party may take in court to compel another party to satisfy a judgment. 38:25 Next, we will consider another process that is similar to the summary judgment process, in that it is targeted at reaching a quick decision. 38:43 This process involves applying to the court for the court to make a decision on a question of law or on a question of construction of documents. I\'ll cover this process quickly. The rule that you should look at is Order 9, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2021. That rule tells us that the court may decide any question of law or construction of any document. The court may do so either on its own motion or a court. 39:11 or on the application of a party. In order for the court to exercise its power under Order 9, Rule 19, it is not necessary for the question to be of a nature that a decision would determine the entire dispute between the parties. What this means is that the question may well be one of many issues in the case. There is no need for the legal question or question of construction to be the only issue in the case. 39:38 Next, you should note that if the Court fully determines the entire matter or claim or issue, the Court may give judgment, dismiss the action, or make any other appropriate order. The power to decide a question of law or construction appears to be discretionary. The provision does state that the Court may decide the question. As for the principles that the Court will apply in deciding whether to exercise its power to decide a question of law or construction, 40:08 Please read the case mentioned on the slides and the syllabus focusing on paragraphs 12 to 18 of that case. Please note though that the case was decided under the old rules of court. 40:27 Next, we\'ll consider another way of obtaining a judgement without a trial, that is by applying for a judgement based on admissions made by the other party. 40:46 The relevant rule to look at is Order 9, Rule 18.2. That rule tells us simply that if an admission or fact is made by a party in pleadings or other documents, the court may, upon application, give a judgement on those admissions. There\'s also a High Court case cited in the syllabus, My City Deal and Villa\'s International 41:16 the other side needs to have admitted all the facts necessary to establish the cause of action and not merely evidence of some of the facts. Please read the case again with the caveat that it was decided under the old rules of God. 41:37 Next, we will turn to consider third party proceedings. This is the process that is to be followed when a defendant wants to bring a third party into the action that has been commenced against him by the claimant. The relevant order in the Rules of Court 2021 that governs third party procedure is order 10. This process applies to both originating claims and originating applications. 42:14 We start with the objectives of third-party proceedings. There\'s a case that\'s quoted in the slides which was decided under the old rules, which is why you\'ll see that there is a reference to Order 16, which was the order governing third-party procedure in the old rules. The statement of the objectives of third-party procedure in the case is still likely relevant, though, so you can read the case. The case tells us that there are two purposes of 42:43 of third-party proceedings. First, to allow parties to raise all issues concerning the subject matter in one set of proceedings. This saves time and costs that would otherwise be wasted if there were multiple actions. The second objective is to avoid inconsistent court decisions if there are multiple actions on the same issues. 43:08 If you have the same issues proceeding to trial in different actions, the outcome may well be different in each action. That is not desirable because you would expect the court to make consistent decisions on the same facts. 43:29 We come now to when you may issue a third party notice, which is the document you file in order to start third party proceedings against a third party. There are three grounds for issuing a third party notice. The grounds are laid out in Order 10, Rule 11 of the Rules of Court 2021, and I\'ve summarized the three grounds on the slides. The first ground is where the defendant 43:58 or indemnity from a third party. In other words, the defendant wants a third party to be responsible in part or in full for the defendant\'s liability to the claimant. So that\'s the first ground. The second ground is where the defendant wants to claim from a third party some relief or remedy that is connected with the subject matter of the action between the claimant and the defendant. The remedy of relief 44:27 the defendant wants to claim from the third party must be substantially the same as some remedy or relief that the claimant is claiming from the defendant. So that\'s the second ground. The third ground is where the defendant wants some issue that is alive in the action to be determined between the defendant and all the claimant and the third party. In other words, there is some issue in the action that is 44:56 that the defendant wants for whatever reason to have a court decision that would also bind some third party. I\'m going to skip over the next few points on this slide which concern the prescribed form for the third party notice when permission is required to issue a third party notice to bring the third party into the proceedings and the procedure you must follow if permission is required. The provisions cited here are quite self-explanatory. You just need to 45:25 spend a bit of time reading through the provisions. 45:35 Right, so after the defendant issues the third party notice, whether with the court\'s permission or without the court\'s permission, the next step is for the defendant to actually serve the third party notice on the third party. Both the third party notice and a copy of the originating claim or the originating application and any pleadings are required to be served on the third party. 46:03 As for the rules that govern service, the same rules apply as in any other originating process. What that means is that you need to serve the third party by way of personal service. Again, the rules on service out of jurisdiction also apply as if the third party notice is an originating process. So essentially you should think of the third party notice as an originating claim or an originating application and serve it in the same manner. 46:32 on the third party. 46:44 The final point I will cover in this lecture on third party procedure is the need to apply for third party directions. Third party directions refers to the directions that the court will give for the proper conduct of the third party proceedings, or rather the proceedings against the third party. So, after the third party files its notice of intention to contest or not contest following 47:11 service of the third party notice on the third party, the defendant must apply to court for directions on how the third party proceedings are to be dealt with by the court. There\'s a time limit for the defendant to make this application for directions and the time limit stated in the rules of court 2021 itself. If the defendant doesn\'t file this application for third party directions within the time limit, 47:40 The third party may proceed to apply for directions itself, or even apply to set aside the third party notice. I will leave you to read for yourself the other provisions referred to in this slide on the procedures for applying for third party directions, as well as the orders that the court may make on an application for third party directions. 48:10 We turn now to the final topic for this lecture, which concerns production of documents. This is an important pre-trial process through which parties in an action commenced by an originating claim are required to disclose to each other the documents they have which are relevant to the dispute. The order governing production of documents in the new Rules of Court 2021 is Order 11. 48:45 Let\'s begin with an introductory point. The production process entails that the parties produce documents. The question then is what exactly is the meaning of a document. There isn\'t a definition in the Rules of Court, but there is a definition in Section 3 of the Evidence Act that you should look up. It\'s a broad definition that goes beyond materials with writing or printing on them. You should also look up 49:11 case mentioned in the slides decided under the old rules on electronically stored documents. That case tells us that electronically stored documents such as emails, databases, backup copies, sound recordings, video recordings, and storage media and recording devices are all documents that come within the scope of a party\'s document production obligation. 49:43 Next, let\'s consider some general provisions on how the Court\'s powers to order parties to produce documents should be exercised under the new Rules of Court 2021. The first point to note is that Order 11, Rule 11 tells us that Order 11 sets out the basic requirements for production of documents. This means that the parties may agree to a broader scope of discovery than contemplated under Order 11. 50:12 Further, the Court may on its own motion apply a broader scope of discovery, if the Court considers that such broader discovery is in the interest of justice. Next, the Rules also expressly require the Court to bear in mind the ideals when exercising its powers under Order 11. Further, the Court must also have regard to two important further principles which underpin the philosophy of the law. 50:40 towards document production under the new rules. I have set out the two principles in the slide. First, a claimant is to sue and proceed on the strength of its case and not on the weakness of the defendant\'s case. Second, a party who sues or is sued in court does not thereby give up its right to privacy and confidentiality in that party\'s documents and communications. 51:10 ideals as well as these two specific principles in mind when considering document production issues under the new rules of court 2021. 51:27 There are two further general provisions to consider. First, Order 11, Rule 1.4 tells us that it will be in the interest of justice to allow for a broader scope of discovery than is contemplated under Order 11, if such broader discovery could aid in disposing fairly of the proceedings. Second, Order 11, Rule 1.5 tells us that if a party applies for a broader scope of discovery, 51:55 The court will not have regard to the two express principles laid out in Order 11, Rule 1.2, namely, the principle that the claimant is to sue and proceed on the strength of its own case, and the principle that a party who sues or is sued does not give up its right to privacy and confidentiality in its own documents. Instead of those two principles, the court will just generally have regard to the ideals and the principle in Order 11, Rule 1.4. 52:24 the first bullet point on this slide, if there is an application by a party for there to be an order for a broader scope of discovery than provided for in the rules in order 11. 52:48 There are two main stages to document production. First, the initial order for production, which is referred to under the old rules as general discovery. And second, the stage where specifically requested documents are produced, which is referred to under the old rules of court as specific discovery. We turn now to the first main stage, which is the initial order for production. 53:17 Let\'s begin first with the question of timing. The court will order production, this initial production at a case conference. As for the times that the court will allow, the rules provide for a default timeline of 14 days for the initial production of documents. 53:42 Next, let\'s see what exactly must be produced during the first stage of the initial production of documents. On this slide, I\'ve outlined the three categories of documents that must be produced at the first stage. First, you need to produce the documents that you are relying on. Second, you need to produce all known adverse documents, in other words, documents that are known to be harmful to your case. 54:11 Third, you need to produce any other documents that come within the scope of any agreed or ordered broader scope for discovery. This third category relates back to the general principles we discussed earlier in Order 11, Rule 1. Order 11 is meant to set up the basic requirements for discovery. The parties may therefore agree on a broader scope of discovery, or the court may order a broader scope of discovery in the interest of justice. 54:40 In those scenarios, the third category will be relevant. Otherwise, the initial production of documents will be limited to just the first two categories. In other words, documents that you\'re relying on and the documents that are bad for your case. 55:06 We turn next to the second main stage of document production, which is the production of requested documents. As mentioned earlier, this process was known under the old rules as specific discovery. This second stage involves an application to court for an order that the other side disclosed specific documents or categories of documents. The provision in the Rules of 55:36 First, let\'s see what may be ordered to be produced upon a request. Order 11, Rule 3.1 tells us that the documents that may be produced are specific documents or classes of documents that are in the possession or control of the party in question. The requesting party must properly identify the requested document and show that the requested documents are material to the issues in the case. 56:04 So you can gather that there are essentially three requirements. First, you need to be able to identify the documents or classes of documents. Second, those documents or classes of documents must be in the possession or control of the party you are requesting production from. And third, you need to show that the documents you are asking for are material to the issues in the case. 56:31 Next, in terms of the procedure, you should note that there\'s a requirement to file a summary table if you\'re asking for more than five categories or subcategories of documents. This requirement is stated in the practice directions. So please note that. Next, note that if the party you are requesting discovery from says that it does not have possession or control of the requested documents. 56:58 the court may order that party to file an affidavit. The affidavit should state that requested documents are not in possession or control of the party, whether that party had such possession or control previously, and if so, what has become of the requested documents. So this means that you can actually get the other party to state under oath that it does not have the documents or that it no longer has the documents. 57:27 and if so, what has become of the requested docu. 57:32 A third and final point to note is that the Court will not order production except in a special case, where the Court has ordered that affidavits of evidence in chief be filed and served before production of documents. What this means is that where AEICs are ordered to be filed early, the Stage 2 of the document production process will only take place in exceptional cases. In most cases, or rather in ordinary cases, 58:02 where AECs before documents are ordered, there will not be a second stage of discovery. 58:22 Next, please note that there is a General Power under Order 11, Rule 4, for the Court to on its own motion and at any time order any party or even a non-party to produce a copy of a document that is in the policy\'s possession or control. This rule is subject to limitations in three rules that we will consider shortly. 58:56 You should note that there are limitations on the scope of document production, both at the first stage and at the second stage. The limitations are summarized on this slide. First, train of inquiry documents need not be produced except in a special case. Train of inquiry documents are documents which are by themselves not material to the issues in the case, but which are instead helpful for leading you 59:25 on a train of inquiry to other documents which are material. Under the old rules, you could request for train of inquiry documents in the second stage of discovery, in other words, the specific discovery stage. Under the new rules of Court 2021, there is a general rule that you need not produce train of inquiry documents unless you can show that your case is a special case. The second limitation is stated in Order 11, Rule 5.2. 59:55 The court must not order production of any document that is a part of a party\'s private or internal correspondence unless it is a special case, or if the document is a known adverse document. What this means is that private or internal documents cannot be ordered to be disclosed unless you can either show that your case is a special case, or that the requested documents are known adverse documents. 01:00:26 The third limitation is stated in Rule 5.3. The court will not order production of documents that are subject to any rule on privilege or where production of the relevant document will be contrary to public interest. So for example, if a document is subject to legal professional privilege, the court will not order production of that document. There are two further sub-rules on the question of privilege that are set out in Rule 8. 01:00:56 order 11 rule 8. I will leave you to read those rules which are self-explanatory. 01:01:12 We will conclude with some miscellaneous important rules to note about production of documents. First, there is a continuing duty to produce documents. What this means is that as and when disclosable documents come into your possession or control, you are under a duty to disclose the documents, even if you are by that time already passed the two stages of discovery. 01:01:39 The rules of Quad 2021 also provide for a timeline of 14 days for you to disclose such fresh documents that come into your possession or control. This means that within 14 days after the document comes into your possession or control, you have to disclose the document to the other parties. Second, please note that there are very serious consequences for not complying with the document production order made under Order 11. 01:02:09 The consequences are set out in Order 11, Rule 7. The court may order that the entire action be dismissed, or that the defence be struck out and judgement entered accordingly. The court may also draw adverse inferences or make any other order as the court deems fit. The court may also punish the party for contempt. Finally, the court may order that the party may not rely on any document that is within the scope of the Order for Discovery. 01:02:38 unless the court approves. 01:02:41 Next, note that confidentiality is not a basis of withholding or objecting to the production of documents. The point to note is that there is a general restriction on the use of disclosed documents in other proceedings. For this rule, see Order 11, Rule 10.1. This is an important rule to take note of. It has its origins in case law, in particular in English case known as 01:03:09 Riddick and Thomas Bort Mills. This is why you will see that the cases refer to this principle as the Riddick principle. The new rules tell us that if you want to use the disclosed documents for other purposes, that means for purposes other than the immediate litigation in which documents were disclosed, you will need to apply to the court for permission, or you will need to get the consent of the disclosing party to the other use of the document. 01:03:40 Next, please note that the party which gave production may also apply for an express order prohibiting the use of the documents for other purposes. In other words, instead of just relying on the general rule in Order 11, Rule 10.1, you may specifically apply to the court for an express order prohibiting the collateral use of the documents that you are disclosing in the litigation. Finally, please note that there is an avenue under the rules to request to inspect the 01:04:10 the originals of any document that was produced in the document production process. The relevant rule to look at is Order 11, Rule 12. 01:04:29 This concludes the lecture on pre-trial processes. Thank you for your attention. B24 CIV - 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 - -