Ng Giok Oh v Sajjad Akhtar: Pre-Action Discovery & Court Assessors' Role in Valuation Dispute
In Ng Giok Oh & 3 Others v Sajjad Akhtar & 2 Others, the High Court of Singapore, presided over by Judicial Commissioner Choo Han Teck, dismissed an application for pre-action discovery. The plaintiffs, previously defendants in Originating Summons No. 727 of 1996, sought discovery of documents from the defendants, who were court-appointed assessors in the prior case. The intended action was based on negligence related to the assessors' advice on asset valuations. The court denied the application, emphasizing the assessors' advisory role and the lack of a clear cause of action, as the original judgment had been set aside by consent.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Pre-action discovery application concerning the discoverability of court assessors' documents. The court dismissed the application, emphasizing the assessors' advisory role.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ng Giok Oh | Plaintiff | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost | |
| Sajjad Akhtar | Defendant | Individual | Application dismissed | Won | |
| Philip Leow | Defendant | Individual | Application dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The plaintiffs sought pre-action discovery of documents from court-appointed assessors.
- The intended action against the assessors was based on negligence.
- The assessors were appointed in a prior case (Originating Summons No. 727 of 1996) involving a valuation dispute.
- The parties in the prior case had agreed to a formula for valuing assets, which included considering market values on specific dates.
- The parties disagreed on the value of the assets, leading to the appointment of assessors.
- The judge in the prior case valued the assets with the assistance of the assessors.
- The parties initially appealed, but later agreed to settle out of court and set aside the judgment.
5. Formal Citations
- Ng Giok Oh & 3 Others v Sajjad Akhtar & 2 Others, OS 655/2002, [2002] SGHC 169
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Originating Summons No. 727 of 1996 filed | |
| Hearing commenced in Originating Summons No. 727 of 1996; parties reached an agreement to settle their dispute | |
| Consent order varied in Originating Summons No. 727 of 1996 | |
| Decision date of Ng Giok Oh & 3 Others v Sajjad Akhtar & 2 Others |
7. Legal Issues
- Pre-action discovery
- Outcome: The court dismissed the application for pre-action discovery.
- Category: Procedural
- Role of court assessors
- Outcome: The court held that the advice of court assessors is not open to scrutiny and that assessors take no part in the judgment.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Discovery of documents
9. Cause of Actions
- Negligence
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arensen v Casson Beckman Rutley & Co | Unknown | Yes | [1975] 3 All ER 901 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the immunity of court assessors from suit. |
| Kuah Kok Kim v Ernst & Young | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR 169 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that pre-action discovery should not be a fishing expedition. |
| Richardson v Redpath, Brown & Co Ltd | House of Lords | Yes | [1944] AC 62 | United Kingdom | Cited to emphasize that a court assessor is not an unsworn witness and is only an expert for the judge to consult. |
| Sutcliffe v Thackrah | House of Lords | Yes | [1974] AC 727 | United Kingdom | Cited regarding the liability of professionals for negligence. |
| The Beryl | Unknown | Yes | [1884] 9 PD 137 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that assessors take no part in the judgment and are not responsible for it. |
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
- Pre-action discovery
- Court assessors
- Valuation
- Negligence
- Originating Summons
- Consent order
15.2 Keywords
- pre-action discovery
- court assessors
- negligence
- valuation
- Singapore High Court
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Civil Practice | 75 |
| Role of court assessors | 60 |
| Court Judgments | 50 |
| Evidence | 40 |
| Negligence | 30 |
| Asset Recovery | 20 |
| Commercial Disputes | 15 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Courts
- Valuation Disputes