Tan Chiang v Permasteelisa: Leave to Appeal & Extension of Time for Service
In Tan Chiang Brother's Marble (S) Pte Ltd v Permasteelisa Pacific Holdings Ltd, the Singapore Court of Appeal addressed whether leave to appeal was required under s 34(2)(a) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act and whether an extension of time for service of the notice of appeal should be granted. The court allowed Tan Chiang's application, holding that leave to appeal was not required because the claim at trial exceeded $250,000 and granted an extension of time for service of the notice of appeal.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Application Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal held that leave to appeal was not required as the claim exceeded $250,000 at trial. An extension of time for service of notice of appeal was granted.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Permasteelisa Pacific Holdings Ltd | Respondent | Corporation | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Tan Chiang Brother's Marble (S) Pte Ltd | Applicant, Appellant | Corporation | Application Allowed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Neo Kim Cheng Monica | Chan Tan LLC |
| Ng Yuen | Ng & Koh |
4. Facts
- Tan Chiang was engaged by PPH as sub-contractors for three projects.
- Tan Chiang sued PPH for the balance of payments due under the three projects.
- PPH counterclaimed against Tan Chiang in respect of work done on two of the projects.
- The amount of Tan Chiang’s claim at trial exceeded $250,000.
- Tan Chiang filed a notice of appeal against part of the judgment.
- The notice of appeal was served out of time.
- A single judge struck out the notice of appeal on the ground that leave was required and not obtained.
5. Formal Citations
- Tan Chiang Brother's Marble (S) Pte Ltd v Permasteelisa Pacific Holdings Ltd, CA 8/2001, NM 8/2002, [2002] SGCA 21
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Judgment delivered by Lai Siu Chiu J | |
| Tan Chiang informed PPH of intention to appeal | |
| Tan Chiang filed notice of appeal | |
| Notice of appeal served on PPH | |
| PPH notified Tan Chiang that notice of appeal was not validly filed | |
| PPH filed Motion No. 3 of 2002/D to set aside notice of appeal | |
| Rajendran J struck out notice of appeal | |
| Court of Appeal allowed the application |
7. Legal Issues
- Leave to Appeal
- Outcome: The court held that leave to appeal was not required as the claim at trial exceeded $250,000.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Interpretation of 'at the trial' in s 34(2)(a) SCJA
- Requirement for leave when the subject matter of appeal is less than $250,000
- Related Cases:
- [1939] MLJ 92
- [1997] 1 MLJ 136
- (1854) 9 Exch 485
- [1949] 2 KB 545
- (1855) 4 E&B 655
- [1999] 4 SLR 401
- S 1712/94
- Extension of Time
- Outcome: The court granted an extension of time for service of the notice of appeal.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Service of notice of appeal out of time
- Factors to consider for granting an extension of time
- Related Cases:
- [1991] SLR 212
- [2000] 4 SLR 46
- Jurisdiction of Single Judge
- Outcome: The court expressed serious reservations whether a single judge has jurisdiction under s 36(1) SCJA to set aside a notice of appeal.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Sub-Issues:
- Power of a single judge to strike out a notice of appeal
- Interpretation of s 36(1) SCJA
- Related Cases:
- [1895] 1 Ch 1
8. Remedies Sought
- Review of ruling
- Setting aside of ruling
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
- Appeals
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boyd v Bishoffsheim | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1895] 1 Ch 1 | England and Wales | Followed on the point that an application to the court for a review is not an appeal. |
| Chan Kee Beng v Ramasamy Naidu | Unknown | Yes | [1939] MLJ 92 | Malaysia | Followed on the point that the determining factor is the amount or value of the subject matter of the civil suit, not the appeal. |
| Yai Yen Hon v Teng Ah Kok & Sim Huat Sdn Bhd & Anot | Federal Court | Yes | [1997] 1 MLJ 136 | Malaysia | Followed on the point that whether there was a right to appeal depended on the value of the claim and not the award given by the trial judge. |
| Dreesman v Harris | Unknown | Yes | (1854) 9 Exch 485 | England and Wales | Followed on the point that no leave need be obtained to appeal if the claim exceeded the limit, even if the judgment was lower. |
| Mason v Burningham | Unknown | Yes | [1949] 2 KB 545 | England and Wales | Followed on the point that it could be different if bad faith could be shown in the formulation of the claim. |
| Mayer v Burgess | Unknown | Yes | (1855) 4 E&B 655 | England and Wales | Followed on the point that it could be different if bad faith could be shown in the formulation of the claim. |
| Pearson v Chen Chien Wen Edwin | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1991] SLR 212 | Singapore | Followed on the factors a court should take into account in exercising its discretion whether or not to extend time to enable a party to file a notice of appeal out of time. |
| Nomura Regionalisation Venture Fund Ltd v Ethical Investments Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2000] 4 SLR 46 | Singapore | Followed on the governing principles for extending time to enable a party to file a notice of appeal out of time. |
| Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Yong Qiang Construction | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 4 SLR 401 | Singapore | Referred to regarding the interpretation of 'trial' but distinguished; court clarified that it does not suggest 'at the trial' means 'at the appeal'. |
| Twin Enterprises Pte Ltd v Peter Lim Heng Wah | High Court | Yes | S 1712/94 | Singapore | Overruled on the point that s 34(2)(a) also refers to the amount of the subject matter on appeal. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 1999 Rev. Ed.) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Leave to appeal
- Extension of time
- Notice of appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Single judge
- Subject matter at trial
- Bona fide claim
15.2 Keywords
- Appeal
- Civil Procedure
- Jurisdiction
- Construction
- Singapore
- Court of Appeal
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Civil Procedure | 90 |
| Appellate Litigation | 70 |
| Jurisdiction | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Appeals
- Courts and Jurisdiction