Anthony Wee v UBS AG: Discovery, Banking Act, and Evidence Act in Foreign Exchange Transactions

Anthony Wee Soon Kim sued UBS AG in the High Court of Singapore, alleging fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation, breach of contractual duty of care, breach of duty in tort, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract related to foreign exchange transactions. The defendant, UBS AG, applied for orders under section 175 of the Evidence Act to inspect the plaintiff's bank records at Bangkok Bank Ltd, ABN Amro Bank, Citibank N.A., and Development Bank of Singapore Ltd. The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal and granted the defendant's application, finding no merit in the plaintiff's objections.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed; defendant's application granted.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Plaintiff Anthony Wee sued UBS AG for losses in foreign exchange transactions. The court granted UBS AG's application to inspect bank records under the Evidence Act.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Citibank NAOtherCorporationNeutralNeutral
UBS AGDefendant, RespondentCorporationApplication GrantedWon
Anthony Wee Soon KimPlaintiff, AppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Anthony Wee Soon Kim of Independent Practitioner
ABN Amro BankOtherCorporationNeutralNeutral
Bangkok Bank LtdOtherCorporationNeutralNeutral
Development Bank of Singapore LtdOtherCorporationNeutralNeutral

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kan Ting ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Audrey NgKhattar Wong & Partners
Hri KumarDrew & Napier LLC
Gary LowDrew & Napier LLC
Anthony Wee Soon KimIndependent Practitioner
Ronald ChooRajah & Tann

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiff engaged in foreign exchange transactions through the defendant bank and incurred substantial losses.
  2. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant's officers did not properly advise him on the transactions, particularly regarding 'swap points'.
  3. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff was an experienced investor who understood 'swap points'.
  4. The plaintiff maintained that his experience was in equities, not foreign exchange.
  5. The defendant applied for discovery of the plaintiff's transaction records with other banks.
  6. The plaintiff claimed the documents were not in his possession.
  7. The defendant sought to obtain the records directly from the banks.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Anthony Wee Soon Kim v UBS AG, Suit 834/2001, SIC 1595/2002, [2002] SGHC 206

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Assistant Registrar granted defendant's application for discovery.
Arguments heard regarding relevance of documents.
Appeal dismissed.
Plaintiff deposed affidavit stating documents not in his possession.
Hearing on ABN Amro Bank's application regarding confidentiality.
Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Discovery of Bank Records
    • Outcome: The court granted the defendant's application for discovery of the plaintiff's bank records under section 175 of the Evidence Act.
    • Category: Procedural
  2. Relevance of Documents
    • Outcome: The court determined that the documents sought were relevant to the proceedings.
    • Category: Procedural
  3. Definition of 'Bankers' Books'
    • Outcome: The court held that correspondence, confirmation notes, confirmation advice, and facility letters are considered 'bankers' books' under section 170 of the Evidence Act.
    • Category: Substantive
  4. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: Not explicitly ruled upon in this judgment extract, but forms part of the plaintiff's claim.
    • Category: Substantive
  5. Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    • Outcome: Not explicitly ruled upon in this judgment extract, but forms part of the plaintiff's claim.
    • Category: Substantive
  6. Fraudulent or Negligent Misrepresentation
    • Outcome: Not explicitly ruled upon in this judgment extract, but forms part of the plaintiff's claim.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Fraudulent Misrepresentation
  • Negligent Misrepresentation
  • Breach of Contractual Duty of Care
  • Breach of Duty in Tort
  • Breach of Fiduciary Duty
  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Banking Litigation

11. Industries

  • Banking
  • Finance

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Lonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co LtdHouse of LordsYes[1980] 1 WLR 627England and WalesCited to determine whether documents in possession of a subsidiary company are within the 'power' of the parent company for discovery purposes.
Williams v WilliamsNot AvailableYes[1988] 1 QB 161England and WalesCited to argue that correspondence, confirmation notes, confirmation advice and facility letters cannot be considered as being of the same genre as ledgers, day books, cash books and account books.
The Asylum for Idiots v HandysidesNot AvailableYes(1906) 22 TLR 573England and WalesCited to support the argument that records are bankers' books even if they are not in use every day, so long as they are referred to when necessary.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Evidence ActSingapore
Evidence Act, section 175(1)Singapore
Evidence Act, section 170Singapore
Banking ActSingapore
Banking Act, section 47(1)Singapore
Banking Act, section 47(2)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Foreign Exchange Transactions
  • Swap Points
  • Discovery
  • Bankers' Books
  • Banking Act
  • Evidence Act
  • Confidentiality
  • Subpoena

15.2 Keywords

  • Foreign Exchange
  • Banking
  • Discovery
  • Evidence Act
  • Banking Act
  • Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Evidence Law80
Fiduciary Duties70
Misrepresentation70
Civil Procedure60
Contract Law60
Banking and Finance50
Banking Law50

16. Subjects

  • Banking
  • Civil Procedure
  • Evidence
  • Foreign Exchange