Hengwell Development v Thing Chiang Ching: Application for Leave to Sue under Companies Act

Hengwell Development Pte Ltd, a shareholder in Far East-Hengwell Pte Ltd, applied to the High Court of Singapore on 18 July 2003, for leave to sue Thing Chiang Ching, Wu Yuqin, Lim Seng Kwee and Far East Packaging Industrial Pte Ltd for allegedly diverting funds from Far East-Hengwell Pte Ltd. Choo Han Teck J dismissed the application, holding that the application was procedurally incorrect as the originating summons related to the matter had already been heard and disposed of.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Hengwell Development sought leave to sue Thing Chiang Ching for misappropriation. The court dismissed the application due to procedural error.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Hengwell Development Pte LtdPlaintiffCorporationApplication DismissedDismissedTay Wee Chong, Yu Siew Fun
Thing Chiang ChingDefendantIndividualApplication DismissedWonAndrew Ang, John Nagulendran

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Tay Wee ChongHee Theng Fong & Co
Yu Siew FunHee Theng Fong & Co
Andrew AngRajah & Tann
John NagulendranRajah & Tann

4. Facts

  1. Hengwell Development Pte Ltd (plaintiff) holds 51% of the shares in Far East-Hengwell Pte Ltd (JV company).
  2. Far East Packaging Industrial Pte Ltd (FEP) is the other shareholder in the JV company.
  3. The plaintiff applied for leave under s 216A of the Companies Act to sue in the name of the JV company.
  4. The plaintiff alleged that Thing Chiang Ching, Wu Yuqin, Lim Seng Kwee and FEP had diverted money belonging to the JV company to themselves.
  5. The plaintiff claimed that a payment of US$1,206,292 by a Hong Kong debtor of the JV company was not paid into the account of the JV company.
  6. The originating summons (Originating Summons 601182 of 2001) was previously heard by Justice Lai Kew Chai on 27 November 2002.
  7. The plaintiff commenced Suit 1233 of 2002 in the name of the JV company against Thing and FEP, later adding Wu Yuqin and Lim Seng Kwee.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Hengwell Development Pte Ltd v Thing Chiang Ching, OS 601182/2001, SIC 600151/2003, [2003] SGHC 154

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Originating Summons No. 601182 of 2001 filed.
Originating Summons 601182 of 2001 heard by Justice Lai Kew Chai.
Suit 1233 of 2002 commenced.
Application dismissed by Choo Han Teck J.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Summons-in-chambers as subsidiary process
    • Outcome: The court held that once an originating summons is fully heard and disposed of, no further applications of a fresh and substantial nature may be made by way of a summons-in-chambers.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Whether further applications of fresh and substantial nature may be made by way of summons-in-chambers once originating summons fully heard and finally disposed of

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Leave to sue
  2. Recovery of funds
  3. Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Fiduciary Duty

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Companies Act, Ch 50Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Summons-in-chambers
  • Originating summons
  • Section 216A Companies Act
  • Misappropriation
  • Breach of fiduciary duty
  • Leave to sue
  • Quorum

15.2 Keywords

  • Summons-in-chambers
  • Originating summons
  • Companies Act
  • Breach of fiduciary duty
  • Misappropriation

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Company Law

17. Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Company Law