Tan Boon Hai v Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan: Review of Costs Taxation in Election Irregularities Case
In Tan Boon Hai v Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan, the High Court of Singapore reviewed the costs payable by the plaintiff, Tan Boon Hai, to 17 defendants after he discontinued an originating summons (OS 1022/1999) concerning election irregularities in the Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan's annual general meeting. The court, presided over by G P Selvam J, addressed the scope of a judge's discretion in reviewing a registrar's decision on taxation of costs, ultimately restoring the original award of $100,000 and awarding costs of the review to the defendants.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application for review of costs allowed; original award of $100,000 restored; costs of review awarded to the defendants.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment reserved
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Review of costs payable in a case concerning election irregularities within the Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan. The court addressed the judge's discretion in reviewing the taxing officer's decision.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan Boon Hai | Plaintiff | Individual | Costs Payable | Lost | |
| Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan | Respondent | Association | Costs Awarded | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| G P Selvam | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Christopher Tan | Allen & Gledhill |
| Yang Ing Loong | Allen & Gledhill |
| Lee Chin Seon | CS Lee |
4. Facts
- The plaintiff filed an originating summons on behalf of himself and 32 other candidates.
- The summons sought a declaration that the election of successful candidates was ineffective due to irregularities.
- The plaintiff sought an order for a fresh election and to restrain the newly elected management committee.
- The plaintiff also sought an order to freeze the funds of the Association.
- An interim order was granted, partially freezing the bank account.
- The originating summons was heard for nine days before being discontinued by the plaintiff.
- The discontinuance resulted in the plaintiff having to pay the costs of the action.
5. Formal Citations
- Tan Boon Hai v Singapore Hainan Hwee Kuan, OS 1022/1999, [2001] SGHC 63
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Association’s annual general meeting held | |
| Originating summons filed | |
| Interim order in favour of the plaintiff | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Review of Registrar's Decision on Costs
- Outcome: The court held that a judge possesses the same discretionary power as the registrar and has both the right and duty to hear the matter de novo, taking into account all circumstances of the case and applying his own discretion to make a completely fresh decision.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Scope of judge's discretion
- Interference with taxing officer's decision
- Related Cases:
- [1993] 1 SLR 542
- [1993] 1 SLR 185
- (1875) LR 19 Eq 473
- [1940] MLJ 4
- [1972–1974] SLR 440
- [1958] 1 All ER 578
- [1993] 3 All ER 20
- [1937] AC 473
- [1999] 1 SLR 82
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the election of the successful candidates was ineffective
- Order for a fresh election
- Order to restrain the newly elected management committee
- 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) v Chai Chung Ching Chester (No 2) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR 542 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a judge should not interfere with the taxing officer's decision on a mere question of quantum except in exceptional circumstances, but this principle was later deemed outdated. |
| Jeyaretnam JB v Lee Kuan Yew | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR 185 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court will only interfere with the taxing officer's discretion if such discretion has been exercised on a wrong principle or the quantum allowed is obviously wrong, but this principle was later deemed outdated. |
| Smith v Buller | N/A | Yes | (1875) LR 19 Eq 473 | N/A | Cited for the doctrine of fettered discretion, where the court is reluctant to go into questions of detail but will do so in a proper case. |
| Re Kana Moona Syed Abubakar deceased; Khatijah Nachiar v Sultan Allaudin | N/A | Yes | [1940] MLJ 4 | N/A | Cited for 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 v Hiap Huat Pottery | N/A | Yes | [1972–1974] SLR 440 | N/A | Cited for 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. |
| Gorfin v Odhams Press | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1958] 1 All ER 578 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the court will only interfere with the exercise of the master’s discretion if it is clear that the master has gone wrong in principle. |
| Madurasinghe v Penguin Electronics (a firm) | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 3 All ER 20 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the judge’s discretion cannot be fettered by the manner in which the district judge exercised his discretion. |
| Evans v Bartlam | House of Lords | Yes | [1937] AC 473 | England and Wales | Cited for the doctrine that where there is a discretionary jurisdiction given to the Court or a judge the judge in Chambers is in no way fettered by the previous exercise of the Master’s discretion. |
| Chang Ah Lek v Lim Ah Koon | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 82 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the judge must exercise his own discretion de novo in the review of the registrar’s award of damages. |
| Malayan Trading Co v Lee Pak Yin | N/A | Yes | [1941] MLJ 207 | N/A | Cited in support of the principle that the court will only interfere if such discretion has been exercised on a wrong principle or the quantum allowed is obviously wrong. |
| Chin Cham Sen v Foo Chee Sang | N/A | Yes | [1952] MLJ 99 | N/A | Cited in support of the principle that the court will only interfere if such discretion has been exercised on a wrong principle or the quantum allowed is obviously wrong. |
| Hart v Aga Khan Foundation (UK) | N/A | Yes | [1984] 2 All ER 439 | N/A | Cited as a case the judge was wrong in believing himself to be bound by. |
| Ng Siew Choo v Tan Kian Choon | N/A | Yes | [1990] SLR 331 | N/A | Cited as an example of a case that was erroneously held at one time. |
| Peh Diana v Tan Miang Lee | N/A | Yes | [1991] SLR 341 | N/A | Cited as an example of a case that was erroneously held at one time. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Order 59 r 36 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Taxation of costs
- Review of registrar's decision
- Fettered discretion
- Unfettered discretion
- De novo hearing
- Election irregularities
- Clan association
- Originating summons
- Interim order
- Discontinuance
15.2 Keywords
- Costs
- Taxation
- Review
- Registrar
- Discretion
- Election
- Irregularities
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Review | 90 |
| Costs | 80 |
| Civil Practice | 75 |
| Taxation | 60 |
| Election Law | 40 |
| Company Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Costs Taxation
- Judicial Review