Hong Pian Tee v Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc: Enforcement of Foreign Judgment & Allegation of Fraud
In Hong Pian Tee v Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc, the Singapore Court of Appeal dismissed Hong Pian Tee's appeal against the High Court's decision to grant summary judgment to Les Placements based on a Canadian judgment. Hong argued that the Canadian judgment was obtained by fraud. The Court of Appeal, comprising Chao Hick Tin JA, Tan Lee Meng J, and Yong Pung How CJ, found no merit in Hong's contention and upheld the enforcement of the foreign judgment, ruling that the allegation of fraud had already been adjudicated upon by the Canadian court and no fresh evidence was presented.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore Court of Appeal dismissed Hong Pian Tee's appeal, enforcing a Canadian judgment against him. The court rejected his claim of fraud, finding no fresh evidence.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hong Pian Tee | Appellant, Defendant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | |
| Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc | Respondent, Plaintiff | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of Appeal | No |
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Les Placements loaned C$350,000 to Wiraco Trading Pte Ltd.
- Hong Pian Tee provided a guarantee for the loan repayment.
- Wiraco defaulted on the loan repayment.
- Les Placements commenced proceedings in Canada against Wiraco and Hong.
- Hong disputed the jurisdiction of the Canadian court.
- Hong alleged the guarantee related to a personal loan from Germain, not Les Placements.
- The Canadian court held Hong and Wiraco jointly and severally liable.
- Hong and Wiraco appealed to the Court of Appeal in Quebec, but the appeal was disallowed.
- Les Placements commenced a writ action in Singapore to enforce the Canadian judgment.
5. Formal Citations
- Hong Pian Tee v Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc, CA 600101/2001, [2002] SGCA 17
- Hong Pian Tee v Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc, , [2001] 3 SLR 418
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Loan agreement signed between Les Placements and Wiraco Trading Pte Ltd. | |
| Senior assistant registrar granted unconditional leave to defend to Hong. | |
| Les Placements commenced a writ action in Singapore to enforce the Canadian judgment against Hong under common law. | |
| Appeal dismissed. |
7. Legal Issues
- Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
- Outcome: The court ruled that a foreign judgment may be challenged on the ground of fraud only where fresh evidence has come to light which reasonable diligence on the part of the defendant would not have uncovered and the fresh evidence would have been likely to make a difference in the eventual result of the case.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Challenge to foreign judgment based on fraud
- Requirement of fresh evidence to challenge foreign judgment
- Related Cases:
- [2002] SGCA 17
- Fraud
- Outcome: The court found no evidence of fraud that would warrant setting aside the foreign judgment.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Allegation of fraud in obtaining foreign judgment
- Admissibility of evidence of fraud already adjudicated upon by foreign court
- Related Cases:
- [2002] SGCA 17
8. Remedies Sought
- Enforcement of Canadian Judgment
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
- Breach of Guarantee
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- International Law
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Codd v Delap | Unknown | Yes | [1905] 92 LT 510 | England and Wales | Cited to argue that leave to defend should be refused if the allegation of fraud is frivolous. |
| Ralli v Angullia | Court of Appeal of the Straits Settlements | Yes | [1917] 15 SSLR 33 | Singapore | Cited as a local case where a foreign judgment was conclusive as to any matter adjudicated upon and could not be impeached for any error of fact or law. |
| Godard v Gray | Queen's Bench | Yes | [1870] LR 6 QB 139 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that a foreign judgment is conclusive as to any matter adjudicated upon and cannot be impeached for any error of fact or law. |
| Grant v Easton | Queen's Bench Division | Yes | [1883] 13 QBD 302 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that an application for summary judgment may be made on the ground that the defendant has no defence to the claim. |
| Vanquelin v Bouard | Court of Common Pleas | Yes | [1863] 15 CBNS 341 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that defences which might have been raised in the foreign court cannot be brought forward in the enforcing court. |
| Abouloff v Oppenheimer & Co | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1882] 10 QBD 295 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that a foreign judgment could be impeached for fraud even though no new evidence was produced and even though the fraud might have been, and was, alleged in the foreign proceedings. |
| Vadala v Lawes | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1890] 25 QBD 310 | England and Wales | Cited for reaffirming the principle in Abouloff that a foreign judgment cannot be enforced if it was obtained by fraud, even though the allegation of fraud was investigated and rejected by the foreign court. |
| Jet Holdings Inc v Patel | Queen's Bench Division | Yes | [1990] 1 QB 335 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that a foreign court's decision on its own jurisdiction is neither conclusive nor relevant. |
| Syal v Heyward | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1948] 2 KB 443 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that it is immaterial that the facts relied upon to establish a prima facie case of fraud were known to the party relying on them at all material times and could thus have been raised by way of defence in the foreign proceedings. |
| Jacobs v Beaver Silver Cobalt Mining Co | Ontario Court of Appeal | Yes | [1908] 17 OLR 496 | Canada | Cited for critique of Abouloff and Valada, advocating that a court should only look into the merits of a foreign judgment if extrinsic fraud was alleged or if the defendant had discovered evidence of intrinsic fraud after the foreign judgment was passed. |
| Woodruff v McLennan | Ontario Court of Appeal | Yes | [1887] 14 OAR 242 | Canada | Cited for elaborating on what constitutes extrinsic fraud. |
| Manolopoulos v Pnaiffe | Unknown | Yes | [1930] 2 DLR 169 | Canada | Cited as an example of a Canadian court following the approach advocated by Garrow JA in Jacobs v Beaver Silver Cobalt Mining Co. |
| Union of India v Bumper Development Corp | Unknown | Yes | [1995] 7 WWR 80 | Canada | Cited as an example of a Canadian court following the approach advocated by Garrow JA in Jacobs v Beaver Silver Cobalt Mining Co. |
| Roglass Consultants Inc v Kennedy | Unknown | Yes | [1984] 65 BCLR 393 | Canada | Cited as an example of a Canadian court following the approach advocated by Garrow JA in Jacobs v Beaver Silver Cobalt Mining Co. |
| Keele v Findley | New South Wales Commercial Division | Yes | [1990] 21 NSWLR 444 | Australia | Cited as a leading case where the New South Wales Commercial Division preferred the Canadian approach to Abouloff. |
| Owens Bank v Bracco | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1991] 4 All ER 833 | England and Wales | Cited for reaffirming the ruling in Abouloff and holding that there was no requirement of any fresh evidence before an English court could try the issue of fraud. |
| House of Spring Gardens v Waite | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1991] 1 QB 241 | England and Wales | Cited as a Court of Appeal case which sought to limit the scope of the Abouloff line of cases. |
| Owens Bank v Etoile Commerciale SA | Privy Council | Yes | [1995] 1 WLR 44 | United Kingdom | Cited for the Privy Council's observation that it did not regard the decision in Abouloff with enthusiasm and adopted the approach taken by the Court of Appeal in Waite rather than that in Abouloff. |
| Roach v Garvan | Court of Chancery | Yes | [1748] 1 Ves Sen 157 | England and Wales | Cited for the historical basis of according finality to a foreign judgment based on the doctrine of comity. |
| Schibsby v Westenholz | Court of Queen's Bench | Yes | [1870] LR 6 QB 155 | England and Wales | Cited for the doctrine of obligations, namely, that the foreign judgment imposes a duty or obligation on the defendant to pay the judgment sum which the courts in the enforcement country are bound to enforce. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Reciprocal Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgments Act (Cap 264) | Singapore |
| Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (Cap 295) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Foreign Judgment
- Enforcement
- Fraud
- Guarantee
- Privity of Contract
- Comity
- Fresh Evidence
- Canadian Judgment
15.2 Keywords
- Foreign Judgment
- Enforcement
- Fraud
- Singapore
- Canada
- Guarantee
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Enforcement of Foreign Judgments | 95 |
| Private International Law | 75 |
| Fraud and Deceit | 60 |
| Jurisdiction | 50 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Conflict of Laws
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law