Jumabhoy Asad v Aw Cheok Huat Mick: Jurisdiction of Court of Appeal in Interlocutory Order Appeal
In Jumabhoy Asad v Aw Cheok Huat Mick and Others, the Court of Appeal of Singapore addressed a preliminary issue regarding its jurisdiction to hear an appeal against an interlocutory order made by a judge in chambers. The court ultimately struck out the appeal, holding that the order in question was interlocutory and the appellant had not complied with the requirements of Section 34(1)(c) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal struck out.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal addressed whether it had jurisdiction to hear an appeal against an interlocutory order. The court struck out the appeal.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jumabhoy Asad | Appellant | Individual | Appeal struck out | Lost | |
| Aw Cheok Huat Mick | Respondent | Individual | Appeal struck out | Won | |
| Bruce Johnson Christopher | Respondent | Individual | Appeal struck out | Won | |
| The Liquidators of Lion City Holdings Pte Ltd (in Liquidation) | Respondent | Other | Appeal struck out | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of Appeal | Yes |
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Loh Wai Mooi | Bih Li & Lee |
| Rowena Chew | Bih Li & Lee |
| Chan Kia Pheng | Khattar Wong & Partners |
4. Facts
- Jumabhoy was a director and later managing director of Lion City Holdings Pte Ltd.
- Lion City Holdings Pte Ltd was wound up on 24 March 2000.
- Liquidators obtained an ex parte order to examine Jumabhoy on company affairs.
- Jumabhoy applied to set aside the order, which was refused.
- Jumabhoy appealed against the refusal, leading to the jurisdictional issue.
5. Formal Citations
- Jumabhoy Asad v Aw Cheok Huat Mick and Others, CA 1/2003, [2003] SGCA 32
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Jumabhoy became a director of Lion City Holdings Pte Ltd. | |
| Jumabhoy became the managing director of Lion City Holdings Pte Ltd. | |
| Jumabhoy ceased to be a director of Lion City Holdings Pte Ltd. | |
| Lion City Holdings Pte Ltd was wound up pursuant to a court order. | |
| Liquidators applied for an order to examine Jumabhoy. | |
| Liquidators filed a protective writ against Jumabhoy, his father, and brother. | |
| Order for examination of Jumabhoy was granted. | |
| Jumabhoy filed an application to set aside the order of Rajendran J. | |
| Tay JC refused Jumabhoy's application to set aside the order. | |
| Court of Appeal struck out the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Jurisdiction of Court of Appeal
- Outcome: The Court of Appeal held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the order appealed against was interlocutory and the appellant did not apply for further arguments.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Sub-Issues:
- Appeal against interlocutory order
- Failure to apply for further arguments
8. Remedies Sought
- No remedies sought
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Appeals
- Liquidation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rank Xerox (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Ultra Marketing Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR 73 | Singapore | Adopted the Bozson test for determining whether an order is interlocutory or final. |
| Bozson v Altrincham Urban District Council | King's Bench | Yes | [1903] 1 KB 547 | England | Propounded the test for determining whether an order is interlocutory or final. |
| Salaman v Warner | Queen's Bench | No | [1891] 1 QB 734 | England | Established the 'application' approach in England for determining whether an order is interlocutory or final. |
| White v Brunton | Queen's Bench | Yes | [1984] 1QB 571 | England | Applied the Salaman v Warner test and declared that the Bozson test was no longer good law in England. |
| L v L | High Court | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR 222 | Singapore | Followed the Bozson test adopted in Rank Xerox. |
| Ling Kee Ling v Leow Leng Siong | High Court | Yes | [1996] 2 SLR 438 | Singapore | Followed the Bozson test adopted in Rank Xerox. |
| Aberdeen Asset Management Asia Ltd v Fraser & Neave Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2001] 4 SLR 441 | Singapore | Followed the Bozson test adopted in Rank Xerox. |
| Tee Than Song Construction Co Ltd v Kwong Kum Sun Glass Merchant | Federal Court | Yes | [1967] 2 MLJ 205 | Singapore | Held that the Bozson test was the correct one to apply. |
| Thomson Plaza Pte Ltd v The Liquidators of Yaohan Department Store Pte Ltd | High Court | No | [2001] 3 SLR 248 | Singapore | Discussed the nature of an order rejecting a proof of debt in a winding up proceeding. |
| Pac Asian Services Pte Ltd v European Asian Bank AG | Court of Appeal | No | [1987] SLR 1 | Singapore | Related to the appointment of provisional liquidators. |
| Soon Peng Yam & Chan Ah Kow v Maimoon bte Ahmad | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1996] 2 SLR 609 | Singapore | Clarified the court's discretionary power in allocating costs. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| O 59 r 3(2) of the Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 1999 Rev Ed) s 34(1)(c) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Interlocutory order
- Final order
- Jurisdiction
- Supreme Court of Judicature Act
- Liquidators
- Winding up
15.2 Keywords
- Jurisdiction
- Court of Appeal
- Interlocutory Order
- Singapore
- Civil Procedure
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Civil Procedure | 90 |
| Judgments and Orders | 80 |
| Winding Up | 75 |
| Jurisdiction | 70 |
| Company Law | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Jurisdiction
- Insolvency