Singapore Telecommunications Ltd v Starhub Cable Vision Ltd: Extension of Time for Filing Reply Affidavits

In Singapore, the High Court heard an application by Singapore Telecommunications Ltd against Starhub Cable Vision Ltd for an extension of time to file reply affidavits. The court, presided over by Justice Kan Ting Chiu, granted an extension for one affidavit related to Mr. S P Slattery but denied the extension for replying to the defendant's expert affidavits. The decision was made on July 20, 2007.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application granted in part and denied in part.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court considered Singapore Telecommunications' application for an extension of time to file reply affidavits, granting an extension for one affidavit but denying it for expert affidavits.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Singapore Telecommunications LtdPlaintiff, AppellantCorporationApplication granted in part and denied in partPartial
Starhub Cable Vision Ltd (formerly known as Singapore Cable Vision Ltd)Defendant, RespondentCorporationApplication partially deniedPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kan Ting ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Cheryl KohTan Kok Quan Partnership
Sean TanTan Kok Quan Partnership
Claudia PoonTan Kok Quan Partnership
Low Chai ChongRodyk & Davidson
Philip Jeyaretnam SCRodyk & Davidson
Sun Rhu-ShiRodyk & Davidson

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff sought extension to file reply affidavits.
  2. Slattery was required to attend before the Indonesian business competition regulator.
  3. Plaintiff was considering appointing experts to respond to defendant's affidavits.
  4. Defendant filed affidavits of evidence-in-chief by Mr Thomas Ee Chong Gay.
  5. Defendant filed affidavits of evidence-in-chief by Ms Rosalind Liew Pieak Yoke.
  6. Defendant filed affidavits of evidence-in-chief by Dr Allaudeen Hameed.
  7. Defendant filed affidavits of evidence-in-chief by Dr Ivan Png Paak-Liang.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Singapore Telecommunications Ltd v Starhub Cable Vision Ltd (formerly known as Singapore Cable Vision Ltd), Suit 634/2003, SUM 2910/2007, [2007] SGHC 119

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Sean Patrick Slattery attended a business competition regulator in Jakarta.
Sean Patrick Slattery attended a business competition regulator in Jakarta.
Plaintiff filed application SUM 2910 of 2007.
Original deadline for filing and exchange of Plaintiff’s reply affidavits.
Orders made on plaintiff’s application SUM 2910 of 2007.
Extended time for Slattery to file his affidavit in reply.
Slattery due to return to work.
Further extended time for Slattery to file his affidavit in reply.
Decision date.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Extension of time to file affidavits
    • Outcome: The court granted an extension for one affidavit but denied it for expert affidavits.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Reasonable grounds for delay
      • Timeliness of application

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Extension of time to file reply affidavits

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation

11. Industries

  • Telecommunications

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Extension of time
  • Reply affidavits
  • Affidavits of evidence-in-chief
  • Experts
  • Regulatory

15.2 Keywords

  • Extension of time
  • Affidavits
  • Civil procedure
  • Singapore
  • Telecommunications

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Extension of Time90
Civil Practice75
Evidence Law60
Evidence60

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Litigation