Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak: Costs in Withdrawn Enforcement Proceedings
In Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak dan Gas Bumi Negara, the High Court of Singapore addressed the issue of costs following the applicant's withdrawal of enforcement proceedings related to an arbitration award. The court, presided over by Sundaresh Menon JC, determined that each party should bear its own costs until 30 March 2006, after which the applicant is to pay the respondent's costs. The decision hinged on the principles governing cost allocation when a matter is withdrawn without a final determination on the merits.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
The applicant, Karaha Bodas Co LLC, is to pay the respondent, Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak dan Gas Bumi Negara, its costs after 30 March 2006. Each party is to bear its own costs from the commencement of proceedings until 30 March 2006.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Costs allocation after Karaha Bodas Co LLC withdrew enforcement proceedings against Perusahaan Pertambangan, focusing on principles for withdrawn matters.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Karaha Bodas Co LLC | Applicant | Corporation | Partial Costs Awarded Against | Partial | |
| Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak dan Gas Bumi Negara | Respondent | Corporation | Partial Costs Awarded | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Karaha Bodas Co LLC obtained an ex parte order to enforce an arbitration award against Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak.
- Enforcement actions were initiated by Karaha Bodas in several jurisdictions, including the United States and Singapore.
- Perusahaan Pertambangan resisted enforcement efforts and sought to set aside the ex parte order in Singapore.
- Karaha Bodas sought to stay the Singapore proceedings pending the outcome of a petition in the United States Supreme Court.
- The application to stay proceedings was dismissed, and Karaha Bodas then sought to set aside the ex parte order on its own motion.
- The court allowed Karaha Bodas's application to set aside the ex parte order but reserved the question of costs.
- Perusahaan Pertambangan withdrew from a consensual understanding to hold proceedings in abeyance and raised a fraud allegation.
5. Formal Citations
- Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak dan Gas Bumi Negara, OS 342/2002, [2006] SGHC 195
- Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak dan Gas Bumi Negara, , [2006] SGHC 148
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Judgment given in Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak and Gas Bumi Negara [2006] SGHC 148. | |
| Hearing to dispose of issues regarding terms on applicant and costs. | |
| Court informed parties of its decision on costs. |
7. Legal Issues
- Allocation of Costs
- Outcome: The court determined the principles for allocating costs when a matter is withdrawn, discontinued, or set aside without a final determination on the merits.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2006] SGHC 148
- R v Warley Justices ex parte Callis (8 December 1993)
- Barretts & Baird (Wholesale) Ltd v Institution of Professional Civil Servants The Independent (8 December 1988)
- [1992] 2 SLR 1017
8. Remedies Sought
- No remedies sought
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Arbitration
11. Industries
- Oil and Gas
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak and Gas Bumi Negara | High Court | Yes | [2006] SGHC 148 | Singapore | Related case concerning the ex parte order and enforcement of the arbitration award. |
| R v Warley Justices ex parte Callis | Queen’s Bench Division (Crown Office List) | Yes | R v Warley Justices ex parte Callis (8 December 1993) | England and Wales | Cited for the principles applicable to costs in cases withdrawn, discontinued, or set aside without a final determination. |
| Barretts & Baird (Wholesale) Ltd v Institution of Professional Civil Servants The Independent | N/A | Yes | Barretts & Baird (Wholesale) Ltd v Institution of Professional Civil Servants The Independent (8 December 1988) | England and Wales | Cited in Callis for principles on discontinuance and costs. |
| Lin Securities (Pte) v Official Assignee of the Property of Tan Koon Swan | High Court | Yes | [1992] 2 SLR 1017 | Singapore | Cited for principles applicable to costs when a matter is withdrawn. |
| R v Wolverhampton Justices ex parte Mould | N/A | Yes | R v Wolverhampton Justices ex parte Mould 157 JP 1017 | England and Wales | Case where a challenge failed, making the applicant's challenge unarguable. |
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
- Ex parte order
- Arbitration award
- Enforcement proceedings
- Costs
- Withdrawal
- Discontinuance
- Setting aside
- Consensual understanding
- Fraud allegation
15.2 Keywords
- costs
- arbitration
- enforcement
- withdrawal
- Singapore
- civil procedure
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Costs | 95 |
| Civil Practice | 85 |
| Arbitration | 70 |
| Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards | 60 |
| Jurisdiction | 50 |
| Enforcement of Arbitral Award | 50 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Arbitration
- Costs