Chun Thong Ping v Soh Kok Hong: Summary Judgment and Amendment of Statement of Claim
In Chun Thong Ping v Soh Kok Hong, the High Court of Singapore addressed the procedural issues arising from the Plaintiff's attempt to amend his Statement of Claim while appealing an Order 14 application for summary judgment. The Plaintiff had commenced an action against Soh Kok Hong and Wee Teck Lee based on a promissory note. After the Assistant Registrar granted the Second Defendant, Soh Kok Hong, unconditional leave to defend, the Plaintiff sought to amend the Statement of Claim. Tay Yong Kwang J allowed the Plaintiff to withdraw the appeal and amend the Statement of Claim, emphasizing that a Plaintiff cannot introduce a new cause of action at the appeal stage without giving the Defendant an opportunity to amend their Defence. The court awarded costs to the Second Defendant.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Leave granted to Plaintiff to withdraw appeal and to amend his Statement of Claim.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Plaintiff's appeal against summary judgment was withdrawn to amend the Statement of Claim. The court addressed the procedure for amending claims under Order 14.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chun Thong Ping | Plaintiff | Individual | Leave granted to withdraw appeal and amend Statement of Claim | Partial | Chen Chuen Tat |
| Soh Kok Hong | Defendant | Individual | Costs awarded | Won | Sarbjit Singh |
| Wee Teck Lee | Defendant | Individual | Judgment in default of Defence entered | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Chen Chuen Tat | Acies Law Corporation |
| Sarbjit Singh | M/s Lim & Lim |
4. Facts
- Plaintiff commenced action against Defendants based on a promissory note for $600,000.
- Second Defendant filed a Defence; Plaintiff applied for summary judgment against him.
- Assistant Registrar granted Second Defendant unconditional leave to defend.
- Plaintiff applied to amend the Statement of Claim to include an alternative claim.
- Plaintiff appealed the Assistant Registrar's decision regarding the Order 14 application.
- The court allowed the Plaintiff to withdraw the appeal and amend the Statement of Claim.
5. Formal Citations
- Chun Thong Ping v Soh Kok Hong and Another, Suit 419/2003, RA 235/2003, SIC 4472/2003, [2003] SGHC 172
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Promissory Note dated | |
| Plaintiff’s solicitors’ letter | |
| Action commenced by the Plaintiff against the Defendants | |
| Second Defendant filed his Defence to the claim | |
| Plaintiff took out an application under Order 14 of the Rules of Court against the Second Defendant | |
| Judgment in default of Defence was entered against the First Defendant | |
| Assistant Registrar heard the Order 14 application and granted the Second Defendant unconditional leave to defend the claim | |
| Plaintiff applied to amend the Statement of Claim | |
| Plaintiff lodged an appeal against the Assistant Registrar’s decision in respect of the Order 14 application | |
| Application to amend was heard by the Assistant Registrar | |
| Parties appeared before Tay Yong Kwang J | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Amendment of Statement of Claim
- Outcome: The court allowed the Plaintiff to withdraw the appeal and amend the Statement of Claim, emphasizing the need for the Defendant to have an opportunity to amend their Defence in response to material changes in the claim.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1998] 1 SLR 483
- Summary Judgment
- Outcome: The court addressed the procedure for amending claims under Order 14 in the context of a summary judgment application.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Judgment for $600,000
- Interest
- Costs
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Loan Agreement
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Techmex Far East Pte Ltd v Logicraft Products Manufacturing Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1998] 1 SLR 483 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a second application for summary judgment is permissible if the factual or legal basis of the claim has been altered due to amendments to the pleadings. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 1997 Rev Ed) O 14 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Promissory Note
- Statement of Claim
- Summary Judgment
- Order 14
- Amendment of Pleadings
- Leave to Defend
- Cause of Action
15.2 Keywords
- Summary Judgment
- Amendment of Claim
- Civil Procedure
- Promissory Note
- Singapore High Court
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Summary Judgment
- Amendment of Pleadings
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law