Inai Selasih (ex Geopotes X): Admiralty Jurisdiction, Wrongful Arrest & Sham Charterparty Dispute

In the High Court of Singapore, Belinda Ang Saw Ean J allowed the defendant, Inai Kiara Sdn Bhd's appeal against the assistant registrar's decision, setting aside the Writ of Summons and Warrant of Arrest of the Inai Selasih. The plaintiff, Jan De Nul NV, claimed breach of contract and moneys owed under a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for dredging and reclamation works. The court found that Jan De Nul NV failed to establish that Inai Kiara Sdn Bhd was the charterer of the Inai Seroja when the cause of action arose, as the relied-upon charterparty was deemed a sham. The court also found Jan De Nul NV liable for damages for wrongful arrest due to mala fides.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed; Writ of Summons and Warrant of Arrest set aside.

1.3 Case Type

Admiralty

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court addresses admiralty jurisdiction, wrongful arrest, and a sham charterparty in a dispute over dredging and reclamation works.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Jan De Nul NVPlaintiffCorporationAppeal DismissedLost
Inai Kiara Sdn BhdDefendant, AppellantCorporationAppeal AllowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Gerald YeeJoseph Tan Jude Benny
Adam Abdul RahimJoseph Tan Jude Benny
Liew Teck HuatNiru and Co
Niru PillaiNiru and Co

4. Facts

  1. Jan De Nul NV (JDN) and Inai Kiara Sdn Bhd (IK) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on 29 November 2002.
  2. The MOU concerned dredging and reclamation works in Malaysia.
  3. JDN agreed to provide dredgers, including the Inai Seroja, for the works.
  4. IK was to secure contracts for dredging and land reclamation works.
  5. JDN arrested the Inai Selasih based on the MOU and a bareboat charterparty.
  6. The court found the bareboat charterparty to be a sham.
  7. JDN sought security for arbitration in Switzerland.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Inai Selasih (ex Geopotes X), Adm in Rem 149/2004, RA 231/2004, [2005] SGHC 132

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Memorandum of Understanding signed
Bareboat charterparty dated
Jan De Nul NV gave notice to terminate the MOU
Inai Kiara (L) Ltd demanded payment from IK
Inai Seroja sold to Port Louis Maritime
Inai Selasih arrested
Norazam bin Ramli's Affidavit filed
Request for Arbitration dated
Bruno Van Den Eede's first affidavit
Security provided for the release of the Inai Selasih to be returned to IK for cancellation
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Admiralty Jurisdiction
    • Outcome: The court found that the MOU had a reasonably direct connection with the use of the Inai Seroja, thereby satisfying the conditions of s 3(1)(h) of the Act.
    • Category: Jurisdictional
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Agreement relating to use or hire of ship
      • Action in rem
      • Liability in personam
  2. Wrongful Arrest
    • Outcome: The court found that JDN acted mala fides in seeking the arrest of the Inai Selasih and was liable for damages for wrongful arrest.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Sham Charterparty
    • Outcome: The court found that the charterparty relied upon by JDN was a sham and gave rise to no legal rights and obligations.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages
  2. Interest
  3. Costs

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Breach of Fiduciary Duty

10. Practice Areas

  • Admiralty Litigation
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Arbitration

11. Industries

  • Construction
  • Maritime

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
The EschersheimEnglish Court of AppealYes[1976] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 81England and WalesCited to determine whether an agreement relates to the use of a ship by looking at the substance of the matter.
Gatoil International Inc v Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co (The Sandrina)House of LordsYes[1985] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 181United KingdomCited for the narrower construction of 'relating to' compared to 'arising out of' in the context of admiralty jurisdiction.
The TychyEnglish Court of AppealYes[1999] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 11England and WalesCited to support the argument that a charterparty remains in effect as long as obligations remain to be performed under it.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Cap 123, 2001 Rev Ed)Singapore
Section 3(1)(h) High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Cap 123, 2001 Rev Ed)Singapore
Section 4(4) High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Cap 123, 2001 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Memorandum of Understanding
  • Dredging
  • Reclamation
  • Bareboat Charterparty
  • Action in rem
  • Admiralty Jurisdiction
  • Wrongful Arrest
  • Mala fides
  • Crassa negligentia

15.2 Keywords

  • Admiralty jurisdiction
  • Wrongful arrest
  • Sham charterparty
  • Dredging
  • Reclamation
  • Inai Selasih
  • Inai Kiara
  • Jan De Nul

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Admiralty and Maritime Law90
Arrest of Vessel90
Sham Contract80
Contract Law70
Breach of Contract70
Wrongful arrest70
Dredging and Reclamation Works60
Jurisdiction50
Evidence40
Arbitration40
Civil Procedure30
Fiduciary Duties30
Estoppel20
Summary Judgement20
Agency Law20

16. Subjects

  • Admiralty
  • Shipping
  • Contract Law
  • Civil Procedure