Tan Boon Hai v Lee Ah Fong: Review of Taxation of Costs Under Rules of Court
In Tan Boon Hai v Lee Ah Fong, the High Court of Singapore, comprising Yong Pung How CJ, L P Thean JA, and Lai Kew Chai J, addressed an appeal concerning the review of taxation of costs under Order 59 Rule 36 of the Rules of Court. The appellant, Tan Boon Hai, representing unsuccessful candidates of the Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan election, initiated proceedings against Lee Ah Fong and other successful candidates. After the initial action was discontinued with Tan Boon Hai required to pay 80% of the costs, a dispute arose over the taxed costs. The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that a judge reviewing taxation of costs hears the matter de novo and is not bound by the registrar's discretion.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court addressed whether a judge reviewing taxation of costs under O 59 r 36 of the Rules of Court is bound by the registrar's discretion. The court held the judge hears the matter de novo.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan Boon Hai | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed in Part | Partial | Yang Ing Loong of Independent Practitioner |
| Lee Ah Fong | Respondent | Individual | Appeal Dismissed in Part | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
| L P Thean | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Lai Kew Chai | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Yang Ing Loong | Independent Practitioner |
4. Facts
- A dispute arose over the election of members to the management committee of the Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan.
- Tan Boon Hai, representing unsuccessful candidates, initiated proceedings against the Association and 33 members.
- Tan sought a declaration that the election was null and void and an order restraining the 33 members.
- An interim order was obtained by Tan partially freezing the Association's bank account.
- The case proceeded to trial for nine days, but no further hearing took place as the parties reached a settlement.
- The action was discontinued by Tan with the consent of the defendants, subject to Tan paying 80% of the costs.
- The parties failed to agree on the quantum of costs, leading to taxation proceedings.
5. Formal Citations
- Tan Boon Hai v Lee Ah Fong & Anor, Civil Appeal No 600043 of 2001, [2001] SGHC 355
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Annual General Meeting held | |
| Interim order obtained partially freezing the Association's bank account | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Review of Taxation of Costs
- Outcome: The court held that a judge on hearing an application for review of taxation of costs under O 59 r 36 hears the matter de novo, and is not fettered by the discretion exercised by the registrar.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1993] 1 SLR 542
- [1993] 1 SLR 185
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the election held on 30 May 1999 was null and void for irregularity
- Order restraining the 33 members from acting or holding themselves out as members of the Association's management committee
- Order for a fresh election to be held
- Order to freeze the funds of the Association
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diversey (Far East) Pte Ltd v Chai Chung Ching Chester & Ors (No 2) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR 542 | Singapore | The court in the present case departs from the decision in Diversey, which held that a judge should not interfere with the registrar's decision unless there is an error of principle or material error. |
| Jeyaretnam Joshua Benjamin v Lee Kuan Yew | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR 185 | Singapore | The court in the present case departs from the decision in Jeyaretnam, which held that the court will only interfere if the taxing officer exercised discretion on a wrong principle or the quantum allowed is obviously wrong. |
| Madurasinghe v Penguin Electronics (a firm) | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 3 All ER 20 | England | Relied on for the principle that a judge has unfettered discretion on hearing an application for a review of taxation. |
| Chang Ah Lek and Ors v Lim Ah Koon | High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 82 | Singapore | Relied on by analogy for the principle that a judge hearing an appeal from the decision of the registrar on assessment of damages is not fettered by the amount awarded by the registrar. |
| Evans v Bartlam | House of Lords | Yes | [1937] 2 All ER 646 | England | Relied on by analogy for the principle that a judge hearing an appeal from the decision of the registrar on assessment of damages is not fettered by the amount awarded by the registrar. |
| Re Kana Moona Syed Abubakar decd v Sultan Allaudin & Anor | Unknown | Yes | [1940] MLJ 4 | Malaysia | Discussed in relation to the rule that a judge must not interfere with the decision of a taxing officer on a mere question of quantum, unless very exceptional circumstances are present. |
| Starlite Ceramic Industry Ltd v Hiap Huat Pottery | Unknown | Yes | [1972-1974] SLR 440 | Singapore | Discussed in relation to the rule that the court will not interfere with the discretion of the taxing officer upon a mere question of quantum if the taxing officer has exercised his discretion after considering all the circumstances and if no question of principle arises. |
| Chin Cham Sen v Foo Chee Sang & Anor | Unknown | Yes | (1952) 18 MLJ 99 | Malaysia | Discussed in relation to the rule that the court will not interfere with the discretion of the taxing officer upon a mere question of quantum if the taxing officer has exercised his discretion after considering all the circumstances and if no question of principle arises. |
| Malayan Trading Co v Lee Pak Yin | Unknown | Yes | (1941) 10 MLJ 207 | Malaysia | Discussed in relation to the powers of a judge sitting in appeal on a taxation matter. |
| Gorfin v Odhams Press Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1958] 1 All ER 578 | England | Discussed in relation to the rule governing the review of taxation of costs by a judge. |
| Ho Yeow Kim v Lai Hai Kuen and Anor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR 246 | Singapore | Reaffirmed the decision in Chang Ah Lek regarding appeals from decisions of the registrar on assessment of damages. |
| Kawarindrasingh v White | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 1 All ER 714 | England | Approved the principle that on an application for review of taxation of costs, the judge has all such powers and discretion as were vested in the district judge. |
| Gardner v Jay | Unknown | Yes | 29 Ch.D 50 | Unknown | Cited for the principle that it is a mistake to lay down any rules with a view of indicating the particular grooves in which the discretion should run, for if the Act or the Rules did not fetter the discretion of the Judge why should the Court do so? |
| In re the Will of FB Gilbert (deceased) | Unknown | Yes | (1946) 46 SR (NSW) 318 | New South Wales | Discussed in relation to the difference between an exercise of discretion on a point of practice or procedure and an exercise of discretion which determines substantive rights. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court O 59 r 36 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Taxation of costs
- Review of taxation
- Rules of Court
- Registrar
- Discretion
- De novo hearing
15.2 Keywords
- Taxation
- Costs
- Review
- Rules of Court
- Singapore
- High Court
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Costs | 95 |
| Taxation of Legal Costs | 80 |
| Civil Procedure | 70 |
| Evidence | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Legal Costs
- Taxation of Costs