Tan Seow Cheng v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd: Pleadings and Particulars in Defamation Claim

In Tan Seow Cheng v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd, the High Court of Singapore addressed an appeal regarding the adequacy of particulars provided in a Statement of Claim. Tan Seow Cheng sued Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited (OCBC) for allegedly disclosing his account information to a third party, Cheong Lam Keong. OCBC sought further and better particulars of the Statement of Claim, which were initially ordered by AR Teo Hsiao-Huey. Dissatisfied, Tan appealed to the judge-in-chambers, Woo Bih Li J, who dismissed the appeal except for one variation. The court held that Tan must provide the name of the staff who allegedly made the remarks and the dates and times the remarks were made, but allowed him to assert the place of the remarks to the best of his knowledge.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed except for one variation regarding the place where the remarks were made.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Tan Seow Cheng sued OCBC for disclosing his account information. The court addressed whether the Statement of Claim must specify the identity of the maker and time of remarks.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp LtdDefendantCorporationAppeal upheld in partPartial
Tan Seow ChengPlaintiffIndividualAppeal DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Woo Bih LiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Kannan RameshTan Kok Quan Partnership
Shalita JayakumarTan Kok Quan Partnership
Vijay Kumar RaiV K Rai & Partners

4. Facts

  1. Tan Seow Cheng was a customer of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited (OCBC).
  2. OCBC allegedly made remarks to Cheong Lam Keong about Tan's account balance.
  3. Tan alleged the remarks were a breach of agreement, statutory duty, and/or defamatory.
  4. Tan commenced action against OCBC without knowing the identity of the staff who made the remarks.
  5. OCBC sought particulars of the Statement of Claim.
  6. The Assistant Registrar ordered the Statement of Claim to be struck out if Tan defaulted in complying with the order to provide particulars.
  7. Tan appealed the Assistant Registrar's order.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Tan Seow Cheng v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd, Suit 1121/2002, RA 282/2002, [2003] SGHC 30

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Alleged disclosure made by OCBC staff to Cheong Lam Keong.
Suit 1121/2002 filed.
RA 282/2002 filed.
Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Pleadings
    • Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff must provide the name of the staff who allegedly made the remarks and the dates and times the remarks were made.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Adequacy of particulars
      • Failure to provide identity of maker of remarks
      • Failure to provide dates and times of remarks

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Breach of Statutory Duty
  • Defamation

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation

11. Industries

  • Banking

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O 26A of the Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Banking Act Cap 19Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Particulars
  • Statement of Claim
  • Disclosure
  • Defamatory remarks
  • Banking secrecy
  • Pre-action interrogatories

15.2 Keywords

  • pleadings
  • particulars
  • defamation
  • banking
  • disclosure
  • statement of claim

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Civil Practice75
Cannabis Law60
Contract Law50
Banking Law40
Evidence30

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Banking
  • Defamation