Hendrawan Setiadi v OCBC Securities: Res Judicata & Striking Out Claims
In Hendrawan Setiadi v OCBC Securities Pte Ltd, the Singapore High Court dismissed Mr. Setiadi's appeal, upholding the decision to strike out his claim against OCBC Securities. The court found that the principle of res judicata applied, preventing Mr. Setiadi from re-litigating the same claim due to a previous action that had been struck out. The court determined that the prior order was intended to preclude any fresh action by Mr. Setiadi against OCBC Securities.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court dismissed Hendrawan Setiadi's appeal, finding his claim against OCBC Securities barred by res judicata due to a prior struck-out action.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hendrawan Setiadi | Plaintiff, Appellant | Individual | Appeal dismissed | Lost | Molly Lim, Philip Ling |
| OCBC Securities Pte Ltd | Defendant, Respondent | Corporation | Claim struck out upheld | Won | Muthu Arusu, Mak Wei Munn |
| Ng Haw Hua | Defendant | Individual | No order specified | Neutral | |
| Tang Boon Hai | Defendant | Individual | No order specified | Neutral |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Woo Bih Li | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Molly Lim | Wong Tan & Molly Lim |
| Philip Ling | Wong Tan & Molly Lim |
| Muthu Arusu | Allen & Gledhill |
| Mak Wei Munn | Allen & Gledhill |
4. Facts
- Mr. Setiadi opened an account with OCBC Securities and deposited $5m.
- Mr. Setiadi deposited US$10m with OCBC Securities for investment in Megaworld shares.
- Mr. Setiadi claimed Mr. Ng guaranteed a 20% return on the Megaworld investment.
- The value of Megaworld shares plummeted, causing Mr. Setiadi to suffer a loss.
- Mr. Setiadi commenced an earlier action (Suit 559/98) against OCBC Securities and Mr. Ng.
- The judge denied leave to discontinue the first action and ordered the claim against OCBC Securities to be struck out.
- Mr. Setiadi commenced a second action in October 2000 after locating Mr. Ng.
5. Formal Citations
- Hendrawan Setiadi v OCBC Securities Pte Ltd, Suit 866/2000, RA 151/2000, [2001] SGHC 290
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Mr. Setiadi opened an account with OCBC Securities. | |
| Mr. Setiadi deposited US$10m with OCBC Securities for investment. | |
| Writ in the first action was filed. | |
| Hearing adjourned to November 16, 1998. | |
| Hearing commenced; counsel for OCBC Securities applied for security for costs. | |
| Hearing adjourned; OCBC Securities applied to amend the defence. | |
| Resumed trial of the first action. | |
| Ms. Lim applied for leave to discontinue the action; leave denied; claim struck out. | |
| Mr. Setiadi commenced the second action. | |
| Mr. Ng entered an appearance to the writ. | |
| Writ served on OCBC Securities. | |
| Deputy registrar struck out the second action. | |
| Appeal dismissed. | |
| Decision Date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Res Judicata
- Outcome: The court held that the principle of res judicata applied, preventing the plaintiff from re-litigating the claim.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Re-litigation of claims
- Abuse of process
- Related Cases:
- Henderson v Henderson [1843-60] All ER Rep 378
- Linprint v Hexham Textiles [1991] 23 NSWLR 508
- Striking Out
- Outcome: The court upheld the decision to strike out the plaintiff's claim, finding it was intended to preclude a fresh action.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Leave to discontinue
- Dismissal vs. striking out
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Rescission of Contract
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Guarantee
- Negligence
- Fraudulent Misrepresentation
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
- Civil Procedure
11. Industries
- Finance
- Securities
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Henderson v Henderson | Unknown | Yes | Henderson v Henderson [1843-60] All ER Rep 378 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle of res judicata and abuse of process, requiring parties to bring their whole case forward in initial litigation. |
| Linprint v Hexham Textiles | Court of Appeal of New South Wales | Yes | Linprint v Hexham Textiles [1991] 23 NSWLR 508 | New South Wales | Cited regarding res judicata and issue estoppel where a party withdraws from trial. |
| Khan v Golechha International Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | Khan v Golechha International Ltd [1980] 1 WLR 1482 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that a party is estopped from asserting the contrary of what was raised in earlier proceedings. |
| SCF Finance Co Ltd v Masri (No 3) | Unknown | Yes | SCF Finance Co Ltd v Masri (No 3) [1987] QB 1028 | England and Wales | Cited in relation to the application of the law of issue estoppel. |
| Thoday v Thoday | Unknown | Yes | Thoday v Thoday [1964] P 181 | England and Wales | Cited to define res judicata as 'cause of action estoppel'. |
| Bradford & Bingley Building Society v Seddon | Unknown | Yes | Bradford & Bingley Building Society v Seddon [1999] 4 All ER 217 | England and Wales | Cited to argue that mere re-litigation does not necessarily give rise to an abuse of process. |
| Ching Mun Fong v Liu Cho Chit | Unknown | Yes | Ching Mun Fong v Liu Cho Chit [2000] 1 SLR 517 | Singapore | Cited to argue that mere re-litigation does not necessarily give rise to an abuse of process. |
| Mullen v Conoco | Court of Appeal | Yes | Mullen v Conoco [1998] QB 382 | England and Wales | Cited to argue that an order made pursuant to an application under O 21 r 3 is similar to one made under O 13 r 9 and is not capable of giving rise to res judicata. |
| Jelson (Estates) v Harvey | Unknown | Yes | Jelson (Estates) v Harvey [1984] 1 All ER 12 | England and Wales | Cited to explain the rule in Henderson v Henderson. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| O 21 r 3 Rules of Court | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Res judicata
- Issue estoppel
- Striking out
- Discontinuance
- Guarantee
- Megaworld shares
- Singapore transactions
15.2 Keywords
- Res judicata
- Issue estoppel
- Striking out
- OCBC Securities
- Hendrawan Setiadi
- Singapore
- Civil Procedure
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Res Judicata
- Issue Estoppel
- Securities Law
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Res Judicata
- Issue Estoppel