The Antares V: Renewal of Admiralty Writ & Balance of Justice
In The Antares V [2001] SGHC 198, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal regarding the renewal of an admiralty in rem writ. The plaintiffs, cargo owners, claimed damages against the defendants, vessel owners, for damaged goods. The issue was whether the renewal and service of the writ should be allowed, considering that certain facts were not presented to the assistant registrar when the renewal order was granted. The court allowed the appeal, finding that the plaintiffs had justifiable reasons for not serving the writ, considering ongoing negotiations and the balance of justice between the parties.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiffs’ appeal was allowed and the order of court dated 13 October 2000 was set aside.
1.3 Case Type
Admiralty
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding renewal of an admiralty writ. The court considered ongoing negotiations and the balance of justice between the parties.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiffs | Appellant | Other | Appeal Allowed | Won | Trevor Ivan D'cruz |
| Defendants | Respondent | Other | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | R Govintharash |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| MPH Rubin | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Trevor Ivan D'cruz | Rajah & Tann |
| R Govintharash | Gurbani & Co |
4. Facts
- Plaintiffs' cargo was reportedly damaged on board the defendants' vessel.
- Plaintiffs issued a protective writ against the defendants to preserve their claim.
- Plaintiffs did not serve the writ since they had taken steps to commence arbitration proceedings.
- Plaintiffs' solicitors had been corresponding with the defendants’ P & I Club on various issues.
- Defendants, through their P & I Club, confirmed that they would be appointing solicitors to accept service of process.
- Plaintiffs applied to court and obtained an order renewing the writ for a further period of 12 months.
- Defendants applied to set aside the order of court which allowed the writ to be renewed.
5. Formal Citations
- The "Antares V", Adm in Rem 414/1998, RA 600336/2000, [2001] SGHC 198
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiffs' cargo was reportedly damaged on board the defendants' vessel M V Antares V | |
| Limitation period under the applicable Hague Rules would have elapsed | |
| Suit time was extended to 20 June 1998 by agreement between parties | |
| Plaintiffs sought a further extension for the suit time | |
| Plaintiffs wrote to the P & I Club | |
| Plaintiffs issued a writ | |
| Plaintiffs' solicitors wrote to the defendants advising them that they had appointed Mr Ajaib Haridass of Messrs Haridass Ho & Partners to be the arbitrator | |
| Defendants’ P & I Club replied requesting the plaintiffs’ solicitors a copy of the contract which called for the appointment of a Singapore arbitrator | |
| Plaintiffs through their solicitors broached the idea of utilising the court process rather than arbitration | |
| Reply from the P & I Club | |
| Original writ of summons expired | |
| Plaintiffs applied to court and obtained an order renewing the writ for a further period of 12 months | |
| Letter of undertaking by the P & I Club | |
| Writ was served on defendants' solicitors | |
| Application by the defendants to set aside the order of court dated 18 June 1999 | |
| Order of court was set aside | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Renewal of Writ
- Outcome: The court allowed the renewal of the writ, finding that the plaintiffs had justifiable reasons for not serving the writ during its initial validity.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Non-disclosure of material facts
- Failure to serve writ during initial validity period
- Related Cases:
- [1987] AC 597
- [1997] 2 SLR 669
- Balance of Justice
- Outcome: The court considered the balance of justice between the parties in determining whether to allow the renewal of the writ.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1970] 2 QB 576
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Damage to Cargo
10. Practice Areas
- Admiralty
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Shipping
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The "Myrto" | House of Lords | Yes | [1987] AC 597 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principles on how courts ought to exercise their discretion when deciding whether the validity of a writ should be extended. |
| The Lircay | High Court | Yes | [1997] 2 SLR 669 | Singapore | Echoed the principle in The "Myrto" and dealt with the issue of material non-disclosure in the affidavit supporting the application for renewal of the writ. |
| Waddon v Whitecroft-Scovill Ltd | House of Lords | Yes | [1988] 1 All ER 996 | United Kingdom | Reiterated the rule that the showing of a good reason for failure to serve the writ during its original period of validity, was a necessary step for the grant of an extension. |
| Kun Kay Hong v Tan Teo Huat | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [1985] 1 MLJ 404 | Singapore | Held that the request by the solicitors’ underwriters to the plaintiff’s solicitors to postpone service pending investigations did amount to good reasons for not serving the writ during its validity period. |
| Jones v Jones & Anor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1970] 2 QB 576 | United Kingdom | Commented that the climate of opinion is ‘moving more towards an ascertainment of how lies the balance of justice between the parties’. |
| The Berny | Queen's Bench Division | No | [1979] 1 QB 80 | United Kingdom | Cited as learning referred to by the defendants' counsel. |
| The "Big Beacher" | High Court | No | [1984] 2 MLJ 4 | Malaysia | Cited as learning referred to by the defendants' counsel. |
| The "Union Hodeidah" | High Court | No | [1987] 2 MLJ 561 | Malaysia | Cited as learning referred to by the defendants' counsel. |
| The Official Receiver, Liquidator of Jason Textile Industries Pte Ltd v QBE Insurance (International) Ltd | High Court | No | [1989] 1 MLJ 1 | Singapore | Cited as learning referred to by the defendants' counsel. |
| Saris v Westminster Transports SA And Kestrel Marine Ltd | Court of Appeal | No | [1994] 1 LLR 115 | United Kingdom | Cited as learning referred to by the defendants' counsel. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Admiralty writ
- Renewal of writ
- Protective writ
- P & I Club
- Letter of undertaking
- Balance of justice
- Material non-disclosure
- Arbitration proceedings
- Suit time
- Limitation period
15.2 Keywords
- Admiralty writ
- renewal
- balance of justice
- Singapore
- shipping
- cargo damage
16. Subjects
- Admiralty
- Civil Procedure
- Shipping Law
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Admiralty Law