Roberto Building Material v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp: Stay of Appeal Pending Payment of Costs
In Roberto Building Material Pte Ltd and Others v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd and Another, the Singapore Court of Appeal, presided over by Justice Choo Han Teck, addressed the first respondent's application to dismiss or stay the appeal of Roberto Building Material Pte Ltd, Tan Heng Yong, Ho Kit Sun, and Tan Heng How, pending payment of taxed costs from the trial below. The court ultimately ordered a stay of the appeal until the appellants paid the costs awarded to the first respondent and furnished further security for costs, finding that the appellants had not demonstrated a sufficiently strong case on appeal to warrant proceeding without satisfying the cost obligations.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal stayed until the costs awarded to the first respondent are paid and further security is furnished.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal addressed the stay of an appeal pending payment of taxed costs, focusing on inherent jurisdiction and powers under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roberto Building Material Pte Ltd | Appellant | Corporation | Appeal stayed | Stayed | Joseph Tan Wee Kong, Foo Jien Huei |
| Tan Heng Yong | Appellant | Individual | Appeal stayed | Stayed | Joseph Tan Wee Kong, Foo Jien Huei |
| Ho Kit Sun | Appellant | Individual | Appeal stayed | Stayed | Joseph Tan Wee Kong, Foo Jien Huei |
| Tan Heng How | Appellant | Individual | Appeal stayed | Stayed | Joseph Tan Wee Kong, Foo Jien Huei |
| Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd | Respondent | Corporation | Appeal stayed | Won | Lee Eng Beng, Chio Yuen-Lyn |
| Don Ho Mun-Tuke | Respondent | Individual | Appeal stayed | Won | Loong Tse Chuan |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | J | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Joseph Tan Wee Kong | Kenneth Tan Partnership |
| Foo Jien Huei | Kenneth Tan Partnership |
| Lee Eng Beng | Rajah & Tann |
| Chio Yuen-Lyn | Rajah & Tann |
| Loong Tse Chuan | Allen & Gledhill |
4. Facts
- The first respondent granted banking facilities to the first appellant in 1995.
- The second, third, and fourth appellants executed deeds of guarantee in respect of those facilities.
- The first appellant defaulted in 1997 but managed to reduce the debt in 1998.
- By March 2000, the first respondent demanded payment of the outstanding debt of $32,921,485.06.
- On 22 April 2000, the first respondent exercised its contractual rights and appointed a Receiver and Manager to the first appellant.
- The first appellant commenced proceedings alleging bad faith and recklessness on the part of the respondents.
- The appellants lost the trial, and costs were awarded to the first respondent and taxed at $280,000 plus $7,000 for costs thrown away.
5. Formal Citations
- Roberto Building Material Pte Ltd and Others v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd and Another, CA 100/2002, Notice of Motion 18/2003, 24/2003, 25/2003, 26/2003, [2003] SGCA 18
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Banking facilities granted to the first appellant by the first respondent. | |
| First appellant defaulted on banking facilities. | |
| First appellant reduced the debt. | |
| First respondent demanded payment of outstanding debt of $32,921,485.06. | |
| First respondent appointed a Receiver and Manager to the first appellant. | |
| First appellant commenced proceedings against the first and second respondents. | |
| Counsel's written submission. | |
| Appeal stayed until the costs awarded to the first respondent are paid and further security is furnished. | |
| Deadline for payment of costs and security. | |
| Appeal scheduled for hearing. |
7. Legal Issues
- Stay of appeal pending payment of taxed costs
- Outcome: The court ordered a stay of the appeal until the costs awarded to the first respondent are paid and further security is furnished.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to pay taxed costs
- Inability to furnish security for costs
- Jurisdiction to order stay of appeal
- Outcome: The court held that s 36(1) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act empowers the court to stay the appeal until costs below are paid and further security furnished.
- Category: Jurisdictional
8. Remedies Sought
- Dismissal of debt claim
- Monetary damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of contract
- Bad faith
- Recklessness
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- Banking
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMS Pte Ltd v Power Energy Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR 767 | Singapore | Cited regarding the procedure for applications to strike out a defence, emphasizing the need for formal summons-in-chambers rather than oral applications. |
| Lascomme Ltd v United Dominions Trust (Ireland) Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [1993] 3 IR 412 | Ireland | Cited regarding stay applications, but distinguished because that case concerned a stay application before trial, whereas the present case is after a full trial. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act | Singapore |
| Rules of Court O 92 r 4 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Stay of appeal
- Taxed costs
- Security for costs
- Inherent jurisdiction
- Impecuniosity
- Receiver and Manager
- Deeds of guarantee
15.2 Keywords
- Stay of appeal
- Costs
- Jurisdiction
- Banking facilities
- Singapore
- Court of Appeal
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Jurisdiction
- Appeals
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Appeals