Denko-HLB Sdn Bhd v Fagerdala Singapore Pte Ltd: Extension of Time for Appeal
In Denko-HLB Sdn Bhd v Fagerdala Singapore Pte Ltd, the Court of Appeal of Singapore dismissed a motion by Denko-HLB Sdn Bhd for an extension of time to request further arguments and file a notice of appeal against an interlocutory order. The court, presided over by Yong Pung How CJ, Chao Hick Tin JA, and Tan Lee Meng J, held that the delay was substantial and the explanation for the delay was insufficient. The underlying action involved a claim by Fagerdala Singapore Pte Ltd for money due on goods sold, with Denko seeking a stay on the ground of forum non conveniens.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Motion dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal dismissed Denko's motion for an extension of time to appeal an interlocutory order, citing a substantial delay and insufficient explanation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denko-HLB Sdn Bhd | Appellant, Defendant | Corporation | Motion dismissed | Lost | |
| Fagerdala Singapore Pte Ltd | Respondent, Plaintiff | Corporation | Motion dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | No |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Denko applied for a stay of action by Fagerdala on the ground of forum non conveniens.
- The Senior Assistant Registrar (SAR) granted the stay.
- Lai Siu Chiu J reversed the SAR's order on 19 February 2002.
- Denko's solicitor failed to apply for further arguments within seven days as required by s 34(1)(c) of the SCJA.
- Denko applied for further arguments on 12 March 2002.
- Denko filed the notice of appeal on 19 March 2002.
- The Registrar notified Denko that the request for further arguments and notice of appeal were invalid.
5. Formal Citations
- Denko-HLB Sdn Bhd v Fagerdala Singapore Pte Ltd, CA No 21 of 2002/F, [2002] SGCA 30
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Lai Siu Chiu J allowed the appeal and reversed the order of the Senior Assistant Registrar. | |
| Denko’s solicitor applied for further arguments. | |
| Denko filed the notice of appeal. | |
| The Registrar of the Supreme Court notified Denko that their request for further arguments was out of time and that the notice of appeal was therefore not valid. | |
| Date | |
| Court heard the motion. | |
| Decision Date | |
| Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Extension of Time to Appeal
- Outcome: The court held that the delay was substantial and the explanation for the delay was insufficient to grant an extension of time.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Oversight of solicitor
- Length of delay
- Prejudice to other party
- Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal
- Outcome: The court held that it did not have original jurisdiction to entertain an application to extend time prescribed in s 34(1)(c) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.
- Category: Jurisdictional
8. Remedies Sought
- Extension of time to request further arguments
- Extension of time to file a notice of appeal
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Appeals
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Tokai Maru | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR 105 | Singapore | Followed the distinction between applications for extension of time to file a notice of appeal and other matters, applying a stricter approach. |
| Aberdeen Asset Management Asia Ltd v Fraser & Neave Ltd | High Court | No | [2001] 4 SLR 441 | Singapore | Referred to for factors guiding the court in determining whether to grant an extension of time to file and/or serve a notice of appeal out of time. |
| Gatti v Shoosmith | N/A | No | [1939] 3 All ER 916 | N/A | Referred to regarding the court's consideration of a solicitor's error as a ground for granting an extension of time. |
| Nomura Regionalisation Venture Fund Ltd v Ethical Investments Ltd | High Court | No | [2000] 4 SLR 46 | Singapore | Referred to for factors guiding the court in determining whether to grant an extension of time to file and/or serve a notice of appeal out of time. |
| Palata Investments Ltd v Burt & Sinfield Ltd | N/A | No | [1985] 2 All ER 517 | N/A | Referred to regarding the court's consideration of a solicitor's error as a ground for granting an extension of time. |
| Pearson v Chen Chien Wen Edwin | High Court | No | [1991] 1 SLR 212 | Singapore | Referred to for factors guiding the court in determining whether to grant an extension of time to file and/or serve a notice of appeal out of time. |
| Seabridge Transport Pte Ltd v Olivine Electronics Pte Ltd | High Court | No | [1995] 3 SLR 545 | Singapore | Mentioned in relation to the approach of applying to the judge for an extension of time to make a request for further arguments. |
| Singapore Press Holdings v Brown Noel Trading | High Court | No | [1994] 3 SLR 151 | Singapore | Cited regarding the effect of a judge certifying that he wished to hear further arguments. |
| Tan Chiang Brother’s Marble (S) Pte Ltd v Permasteelista Pacific Holdings Ltd | High Court | No | [2002] 2 SLR 225 | Singapore | Referred to regarding extenuating circumstances in relation to a solicitor's mistakes or oversight. |
| Thomson Plaza Pte ltd v The Liquidators of Yaohan Department Store Pte Ltd | High Court | No | [2001] 3 SLR 248 | Singapore | Cited regarding the effect of a judge certifying that he wished to hear further arguments. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court O 56 r 2 |
| Rules of Court O 3 r 4 |
| Rules of Court O 57 r 17 |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322) s 34(1)(c) | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322) ss 18(2) | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322) s 29A(3) | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322) s 37(2) | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 15, 1970 Edition) s 34(2) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Extension of time
- Interlocutory order
- Forum non conveniens
- Oversight
- Jurisdiction
- Further arguments
15.2 Keywords
- extension of time
- appeal
- jurisdiction
- civil procedure
- court of appeal
- singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Extension of Time | 80 |
| Civil Practice | 75 |
| Appellate Practice | 60 |
| Jurisdiction | 50 |
| Breach of Contract | 30 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
| Asset Recovery | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Jurisdiction
- Appeals
- Extension of Time