Lim Eng Beng v Siow Soon Kim: Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
In Lim Eng Beng @ Lim Jia Le v Siow Soon Kim and Others, the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by the defendants for a stay of execution pending appeal, following an order requiring them to pay $221,894.75 and deliver documents to the plaintiff, Lim Eng Beng, in a partnership dispute. The court granted an extension for document delivery, noting that the payment had already been made. The underlying claim involved a dispute over concealed revenue from the partnership, Kim Meng Supplier, after Lim Eng Beng's departure.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application for stay of execution granted in part; extension granted for document delivery, payment already made.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Application for stay of execution pending appeal in a partnership dispute. The court granted an extension for document delivery but noted payment had been made.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lim Eng Beng @ Lim Jia Le | Plaintiff | Individual | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | A Rajandran |
| Siow Soon Kim | Defendant | Individual | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | Harbajan Singh, Ronald Lee |
| Chua Beng Guek | Defendant | Individual | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | Harbajan Singh, Ronald Lee |
| Siow Soon Geok | Defendant | Individual | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | Harbajan Singh, Ronald Lee |
| Siow Soon Lye | Defendant | Individual | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | Harbajan Singh, Ronald Lee |
| Kim Meng Supplier | Defendant | Partnership | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | Harbajan Singh, Ronald Lee |
| S S Kim Enterprises Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | Harbajan Singh, Ronald Lee |
| ASD Trading Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made | Partial | Harbajan Singh, Ronald Lee |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| MPH Rubin | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| A Rajandran | A Rajandran, Joseph & Nayar |
| Harbajan Singh | Daisy Yeo & Co |
| Ronald Lee | Daisy Yeo & Co |
4. Facts
- Defendants applied for a stay of execution pending appeal.
- The court had ordered the defendants to pay $221,894.75 and deliver documents.
- Defendants requested an extension of time to comply with the order.
- The sum of $221,894.75 had been paid by the defendants to the plaintiff.
- The plaintiff and first defendant were partners in Kim Meng Supplier.
- The plaintiff claimed concealed revenue from the partnership.
- The defendants elected not to offer evidence on their behalf at trial.
5. Formal Citations
- Lim Eng Beng @ Lim Jia Le v Siow Soon Kim and Others (No 2), Suit 140/2002, SIC 2984/2003, [2003] SGHC 151
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Partnership firm Kim Meng Supplier registered. | |
| Lim Eng Beng left the partnership. | |
| Court order issued requiring payment and document delivery. | |
| Defendants applied for a stay of execution. | |
| Hearing on stay of execution application. | |
| First defendant filed further affidavit requesting extension. | |
| First defendant filed further affidavit. | |
| Further hearing on the application. | |
| Decision date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome: Extension granted for document delivery; payment already made.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1992] 4 All ER 887
- [1990] SLR 740
- [2000] 1 SLR 701
8. Remedies Sought
- Stay of Execution
- Extension of Time
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Partnership Agreement
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Food Supply
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Central Bank of India v Hemant Govindprasad Bansal | High Court | Yes | [2002] 3 SLR 190 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a defendant's failure to adduce evidence can be fatal to their case if the plaintiff has presented prima facie evidence. |
| Bowmakers Ltd v Barnet Instruments Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1944] 2 All ER 579 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the principle that a plaintiff's acquiescence to a scheme to evade tax does not necessarily prevent recovery of proprietary interests. |
| Tinsley v Milligan | House of Lords | Yes | [1993] 3 All ER 65 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the principle that a plaintiff's acquiescence to a scheme to evade tax does not necessarily prevent recovery of proprietary interests. |
| Nelson v Nelson | High Court of Australia | Yes | (1995) 184 CLR 538 | Australia | Cited regarding the principle that a plaintiff's acquiescence to a scheme to evade tax does not necessarily prevent recovery of proprietary interests. |
| Euro-Diam Ltd v Bathhurst | Unknown | Yes | [1988] 2 All ER 23 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the principle that a plaintiff's acquiescence to a scheme to evade tax does not necessarily prevent recovery of proprietary interests. |
| Linotype-Hell Finance Ltd v Baker | Unknown | Yes | [1992] 4 All ER 887 | England and Wales | Cited for the modern approach to stay of execution pending appeal. |
| Lee Kuan Yew v JB Jeyaretnam | Unknown | Yes | [1990] SLR 740 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a successful party should not be deprived of the fruits of their victory pending appeal unless special circumstances are shown. |
| Cathay Theatres Pte Ltd v LKM Investment Holdings Pte Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR 701 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a successful party should not be deprived of the fruits of their victory pending appeal unless special circumstances are shown. |
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
- Stay of execution
- Extension of time
- Partnership
- Accounts and inquiries
- Banker's guarantee
15.2 Keywords
- Stay of execution
- Partnership dispute
- Singapore
- Civil procedure
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Partnership Dispute
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Partnership Law