Transfield Shipping v Sino-Add: Mareva Injunction & Arbitration in Charter-Party Dispute
In Transfield Shipping Inc Panama v Sino-Add (Singapore) Pte Ltd, the Singapore High Court addressed applications by Sino-Add to discharge a Mareva injunction and stay proceedings in favor of arbitration. Transfield Shipping, the time charterer of the vessel ‘Angelic Spirit’, claimed US$658,995.37 from Sino-Add for freight, demurrage, and other charges under a voyage charter-party. The High Court dismissed both of Sino-Add's applications, upholding the Mareva injunction and refusing to stay the proceedings.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Applications dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case involving a Mareva injunction and stay of proceedings in a charter-party dispute. The court dismissed both applications.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfield Shipping Inc Panama | Plaintiff | Corporation | Applications dismissed | Lost | Danny Chua, Magdalene Chew |
| Sino-Add (Singapore) Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Applications dismissed | Lost | Philip Ling, Ng Ee San |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Danny Chua | Joseph Tan Jude Benny |
| Magdalene Chew | Joseph Tan Jude Benny |
| Philip Ling | Wong Tan & Molly Lim |
| Ng Ee San | Wong Tan & Molly Lim |
4. Facts
- Transfield Shipping claimed US$658,995.37 from Sino-Add for freight, demurrage, and other charges.
- Transfield Shipping obtained a Mareva injunction over Sino-Add's assets.
- Sino-Add applied to discharge the injunction and stay the proceedings.
- Sino-Add's registered address was at an accounting firm, Paul Wan & Co.
- Sino-Add did not have a telephone or fax number listed under its name.
- Directors of Sino-Add were Chinese citizens, with limited presence in Singapore.
- Plaintiffs alleged Sino-Add threatened to 'walk away' or 'disappear' if legal action was taken.
5. Formal Citations
- Transfield Shipping Inc Panama v Sino-Add (Singapore) Pte Ltd, Suit 763/2001X, SIC 1487/2001, [2001] SGHC 239
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Sino-Add (Singapore) Pte Ltd incorporated. | |
| Transfield Shipping entered into a voyage charter-party with Sino-Add. | |
| Transfield Shipping sent Sino-Add an invoice for US$658,995.37. | |
| Second demand for payment sent. | |
| Third demand for payment sent. | |
| Plaintiffs issued an arbitration notice. | |
| Fourth demand for payment sent. | |
| Action started by the plaintiffs. | |
| Applications dismissed. |
7. Legal Issues
- Discharge of Mareva Injunction
- Outcome: The court found that the plaintiffs had established a risk of asset dissipation and had not failed to disclose material facts, therefore the application to discharge the injunction was dismissed.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Risk of dissipation of assets
- Non-disclosure of material facts
- Stay of Proceedings for Arbitration
- Outcome: The court held that the arbitration clause related only to general average disputes and that the plaintiffs had not commenced arbitration proceedings, therefore the application for a stay was dismissed.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Construction of arbitration clause
- Commencement of arbitration proceedings
- Abuse of process
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Mareva Injunction
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Arbitration
- Shipping
- Mareva Injunctions
11. Industries
- Shipping
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bank Mellat v Nikpour | N/A | Yes | [1985] FSR 87 | N/A | Cited for the principle that parties seeking injunctions must make full and frank disclosure of all material facts and circumstances. |
| Brinks-Mat Ltd v Elcombe | N/A | Yes | [1980] 3 All ER 188 | N/A | Cited for the principle that parties seeking injunctions must make full and frank disclosure of all material facts and circumstances. |
| Tritonia Shipping Inc v South Nelson Forest Products Corporation | N/A | Yes | [1996] 1 LLR 114 | N/A | Cited regarding the construction of an arbitration clause in a charter-party. |
| The ‘Ioanna’ | N/A | Yes | [1978] 1 LLR 238 | N/A | Cited regarding the construction of an arbitration clause in a charter-party, specifically in relation to general average disputes. |
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
- Mareva Injunction
- Charter-Party
- Arbitration Clause
- Dissipation of Assets
- Non-Disclosure
- General Average
- Stay of Proceedings
15.2 Keywords
- Mareva Injunction
- Arbitration
- Charter-Party
- Shipping
- Singapore
- Contract Law
16. Subjects
- Shipping Dispute
- Arbitration
- Injunctions
- Contract Law
17. Areas of Law
- Arbitration Law
- Contract Law
- Shipping Law
- Civil Procedure
- Injunctions