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 heard an appeal by Hong Pian Tee against a High Court decision granting summary judgment to Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc, a Canadian company, to enforce a Canadian judgment against Hong. The primary legal issue was whether the Canadian judgment should be enforced in Singapore, given Hong's allegation that it was obtained by fraud. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the Canadian judgment was enforceable and that Hong had not provided sufficient evidence of fraud to warrant re-litigation of the issue in Singapore.
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 enforces a Canadian judgment, dismissing allegations of fraud. The court clarifies principles for enforcing foreign judgments.
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 | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | No |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Les Placements, a Canadian company, entered into a loan agreement with Wiraco, a Singapore company.
- Hong guaranteed the loan from Les Placements to Wiraco.
- Wiraco defaulted on the loan repayment.
- Les Placements commenced proceedings against Wiraco and Hong in Canada.
- Hong alleged he never guaranteed a loan from Les Placements to Wiraco.
- The Canadian court rejected Hong’s defences and held him liable.
- 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, MA No 32 of 2002/01, [2002] SGCA 18
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Loan agreement signed between Les Placements and Wiraco Trading Pte Ltd. | |
| Suit No. 229 of 2000/S filed by Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc against Hong Pian Tee. | |
| Senior Assistant Registrar granted unconditional leave to defend to Hong Pian Tee. | |
| Civil Appeal No 600101 of 2001 filed. | |
| Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
- Outcome: The court held that the foreign judgment was enforceable, subject to certain exceptions.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Conclusiveness of foreign judgment
- Re-litigation of issues already decided by a foreign court
- Requirements for enforcing a foreign judgment
- Related Cases:
- (1890) L.R. 6 QB 139
- [1915-23] XV SSLR 33
- (1883) 3 QBD 302
- Fraud in Obtaining Foreign Judgment
- Outcome: The court held that the allegation of fraud was not supported by fresh evidence and did not warrant re-litigation of the issue.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Allegation of fraud
- New evidence of fraud
- Re-litigation of fraud issue
- Related Cases:
- (1882) 10 QBD 295
- (1890) 25 QBD 310
- (1908) 17 OLR 496
- (1991) 21 NSWLR 444
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
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goddard v Gray | Queen's Bench | Yes | (1890) L.R. 6 QB 139 | England and Wales | Followed 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. |
| Ralli v Angullia | Court of Appeal of the Straits Settlements | Yes | [1915-23] XV SSLR 33 | Singapore | Followed 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 in an action based on it, apart from special grounds. |
| Grant v Eaton | Queen's Bench Division | Yes | (1883) 3 QBD 302 | England and Wales | Followed for the principle that an application for summary judgment may be made in respect of an action to enforce a foreign judgment on the ground that the defendant has no defence to the claim. |
| Abouloff v Oppenheimer | Court of Appeal | No | (1882) 10 QBD 295 | England and Wales | Discussed and not followed regarding the principle that a foreign judgment can be impeached for fraud even if the issue was investigated in the foreign proceedings. |
| Vadala v Lawes | Court of Appeal | No | (1890) 25 QBD 310 | England and Wales | Discussed and not followed regarding the principle that a foreign judgment can be impeached for fraud even if the issue was investigated in the foreign proceedings. |
| Jet Holdings Inc v Patel | England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) | No | [1989] 2 All ER 648 | England and Wales | Discussed and not followed regarding the principle that a foreign judgment can be impeached for fraud even if the issue was investigated in the foreign proceedings. |
| Syal v Heyward | Court of Appeal | No | [1948] 2 KB 443 | England and Wales | Discussed and not followed regarding the principle that a foreign judgment can be impeached for fraud even if the issue was investigated in the foreign proceedings. |
| Jacobs v Beaver | Ontario Court of Appeal | Yes | (1908) 17 OLR 496 | Canada | Followed for the principle 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. |
| Keele v Findley | NSW Commercial Division | Yes | (1991) 21 NSWLR 444 | Australia | Followed for the principle that fraud was a defence to an action on a foreign judgment only if there had been a new discovery of material evidence which would establish fraud and make it reasonably probable that the opposite result would have been reached. |
| Owens Bank Ltd v Bracco | Court of Appeal | No | [1991] 4 AER 833 | England and Wales | Discussed and distinguished regarding the requirement of fresh evidence before an English court could try the issue of fraud in relation to a foreign judgment. |
| House of Spring Gardens Ltd v Waite | Court of Appeal | No | [1991] 1 QB 241 | England and Wales | Discussed regarding the circumstances under which the issue of fraud in a foreign judgment can be re-litigated. |
| Owens Bank Ltd v Etoile Commerciale SA | Privy Council | No | [1995] 1 WLR 44 | United Kingdom | Discussed regarding the court's lack of enthusiasm for the decision in Abouloff. |
| Manolopoulos v Pnaiffe | Nova Scotia Supreme Court | Yes | [1930] 2 DLR 169 | Canada | Followed the approach advocated by Garrow JA in Jacobs v Beaver. |
| Union of India v Bumber Development Corp | Alberta Court of Queen's Bench | Yes | [1995] 7 W.W.R 80 | Canada | Followed the approach advocated by Garrow JA in Jacobs v Beaver. |
| Roglass Consultants Inc v Kennedy Lock & Willet Inc | British Columbia Supreme Court | Yes | (1984) 65 BCLR 393 | Canada | Followed the approach advocated by Garrow JA in Jacobs v Beaver. |
| Woodruff v McLennan | Ontario Court of Appeal | No | (1887) 14 OAR 242 | Canada | Discussed regarding the definition of extrinsic fraud. |
| Vanquelin v Bouard | Court of Common Pleas | Yes | 15 C.B.N.S. 341 | England and Wales | Followed for the principle that defences which might have been raised in the foreign court cannot be brought forward in the enforcement court for the purpose of setting aside the judgment. |
| Roach v Garvan | Court of Chancery | No | (1748) 1 Ves Sen 157 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the doctrine of comity. |
| Schibsby v Westenholz | Court of Queen's Bench | No | (1870) LR 6 QB 155 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the doctrine of obligations. |
| Codd v Delap | England and Wales High Court | No | [1905] 92 LT 510 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the argument that leave to defend would be refused, if it was obvious that the allegation of fraud was frivolous. |
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
- Foreign Judgment
- Enforcement
- Fraud
- Comity
- Privity of Contract
- Summary Judgment
- Guarantee
- Re-litigation
- Fresh Evidence
15.2 Keywords
- Foreign Judgment
- Enforcement
- Fraud
- Singapore
- Canada
- Guarantee
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Conflict of Laws | 90 |
| Fraud and Deceit | 60 |
| Contract Law | 50 |
| Guarantee | 40 |
| Summary Judgement | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Conflict of Laws
- Civil Procedure
- International Law