Precious Wishes Ltd v Sinoble Metalloy: Contempt of Court for Mareva Injunction Breach

In Precious Wishes Limited v Sinoble Metalloy International (Pte) Ltd, the High Court of Singapore found Sinoble Metalloy International (Pte) Ltd and its director, Mr. Tay Sien Djim, guilty of contempt of court for breaching a Mareva injunction obtained by Precious Wishes Limited and for failing to properly disclose the company's assets. The court ordered the repayment of S$150,000 and sentenced Mr. Tay to three months' imprisonment.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Defendants found guilty of contempt of court.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Sinoble Metalloy and its director, Mr. Tay, were found guilty of contempt of court for breaching a Mareva injunction and failing to disclose assets.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Precious Wishes LimitedPlaintiffCorporationJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Sinoble Metalloy International (Pte) LtdDefendantCorporationContempt of CourtLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Judith PrakashJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Augustine LiewHaridass Ho & Partners
Keuk Ping YangHaridass Ho & Partners
Tan Siah YongPiah Tan & Partners

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiffs chartered their vessel to the defendants.
  2. Defendants failed to pay charter hire as agreed.
  3. Plaintiffs obtained a Mareva injunction against the defendants.
  4. Defendants withdrew US$96,000 from their account after receiving notice of the injunction.
  5. Defendants failed to disclose the withdrawn funds in their affidavit of assets.
  6. Mr. Tay, a director of the defendant company, claimed the withdrawal was a loan to himself.
  7. Mr. Tay's credibility was severely damaged during cross-examination.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Precious Wishes Limited v Sinoble Metalloy International (Pte) Ltd, Adm in Per 790/1998, [2000] SGHC 5

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Plaintiffs chartered their vessel to the defendants.
Vessel delivered to the defendants.
First missed charter hire payment.
Second missed charter hire payment.
Plaintiffs commenced action to recover outstanding hire and obtained a Mareva injunction.
Notice of injunction sent to defendants via fax.
Defendants withdrew US$96,000 from their US$ account.
Injunction order and writ served on the defendants.
Plaintiffs obtained order requiring disclosure of assets by the defendants.
Order for disclosure of assets served on the defendants.
Judgment in default of appearance obtained by the plaintiffs.
Copies of injunction orders served on Mr. Tay.
Defendants filed an affidavit in purported satisfaction of the second order of court.
Contempt proceedings heard.
Contempt proceedings heard.
Mr. Tay sentenced to three months’ imprisonment.
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Contempt of Court
    • Outcome: The court found the defendants guilty of contempt of court for breaching the Mareva injunction and failing to disclose assets.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Breach of Mareva Injunction
      • Failure to Disclose Assets

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Order of committal against Mr. Tay
  2. Restoration of S$150,000
  3. Costs

9. Cause of Actions

  • Contempt of Court

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Shipping

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Mareva Injunction
  • Contempt of Court
  • Disclosure of Assets
  • Charter Hire
  • Withdrawal of Funds

15.2 Keywords

  • Contempt
  • Mareva Injunction
  • Shipping
  • Singapore
  • Breach of Injunction

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Mareva Injunctions85
Contempt of Court80
Injunctions75
Judgments and Orders60
Litigation60
Commercial Disputes50
Company Law40
Asset Recovery40
Banking Law30
Banking and Finance30
Fraud and Deceit30
Contract Law20

16. Subjects

  • Contempt of Court
  • Injunctions
  • Shipping