CCM Industrial v Uniquetech: Indemnity Costs & Offer to Settle Dispute
In CCM Industrial Pte Ltd v Uniquetech Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore dismissed CCM Industrial's appeal against the district judge's decision to award indemnity costs to Uniquetech from the date of their offer to settle. The dispute arose from a tenancy agreement and unpaid rent, leading to a claim by CCM Industrial and a counterclaim by Uniquetech. The court found CCM Industrial's conduct unreasonable in rejecting Uniquetech's settlement offer and refusing mediation, thus warranting the imposition of indemnity costs.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
CCM Industrial's appeal against indemnity costs to Uniquetech was dismissed. The court found CCM's conduct unreasonable in rejecting a settlement offer.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCM Industrial Pte Ltd | Appellant, Plaintiff | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | |
| Uniquetech Pte Ltd | Respondent, Defendant | Corporation | Costs awarded on an indemnity basis | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chan Sek Keong | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Leong Yung Chang | Veritas Law Corporation |
| Uthayasurian s/o Sidambaram | Surian & Partners |
4. Facts
- CCM Industrial terminated a tenancy agreement with Uniquetech due to unpaid rent of $64,134.00.
- Uniquetech claimed CCM Industrial owed them $62,728.48 and sought to set off this amount against the rent arrears.
- CCM Industrial commenced DC Suit 1614/2007 to recover the rent arrears.
- Uniquetech filed a defence of set-off and counterclaimed $62,115.68, also making an offer to settle for $2,018.32.
- CCM Industrial rejected the offer to settle and refused mediation.
- CCM Industrial later offered to settle for $2,018.32, but Uniquetech counter-proposed that CCM Industrial pay costs.
- A consent judgment was recorded in favor of CCM Industrial for $2,018.32, with costs to be decided by the court.
5. Formal Citations
- CCM Industrial Pte Ltd v Uniquetech Pte Ltd, DA 13/2008, [2008] SGHC 216
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| CCM Industrial informed Uniquetech of tenancy agreement termination due to unpaid rent. | |
| CCM Industrial commenced District Court Suit No 1614 of 2007 to recover $64,134.00. | |
| Uniquetech filed a defence of set-off and counterclaimed $62,115.68; made an offer to settle. | |
| Affidavits of evidence-in-chief were exchanged. | |
| Pre-trial conference held; CCM Industrial rejected mediation proposal. | |
| Confirmatory pre-trial conference held; CCM Industrial indicated it would not contest the counterclaim. | |
| Consent judgment recorded in favor of CCM Industrial against Uniquetech for $2,018.32; costs to be decided by the court. | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Indemnity Costs
- Outcome: The court upheld the imposition of indemnity costs due to the appellant's unreasonable conduct.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Unreasonable conduct of litigation
- Failure to accept reasonable settlement offer
- Offer to Settle
- Outcome: The court found the offer to settle was not ambiguous, but the judgment sum was slightly more favorable. However, the court still awarded indemnity costs.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Ambiguity of offer
- Withdrawal of offer
- Judgment more or less favorable than offer
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Costs
9. Cause of Actions
- Recovery of Rent Arrears
- Set-off
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBS Transit Ltd v Teo Chye Seng Douglas | High Court | Yes | [2005] SGHC 15 | Singapore | Cited regarding ambiguity in an offer to settle. |
| Singapore Airlines Ltd v Tan Shwu Leng | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2001] 4 SLR 593 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an offer to settle should be considered in determining costs, even if the judgment is slightly more favorable. |
| Harte Denis Matthew v Tan Hun Hoe | High Court | Yes | [2001] SGHC 19 | Singapore | Cited for the test of what is just and fair in determining costs. |
| Chan Choy Ling v Chua Che Teck | High Court | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR 667 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a party who unreasonably fails to resolve issues may be penalized in costs. |
| The “Endurance 1” | High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 661 | Singapore | Cited for the spirit behind Order 22A, which is to encourage the termination of litigation by agreement of the parties. |
| Public Prosecutor v Viran | High Court | Yes | [1947] 1 MLJ 62 | Malaysia | Cited for the meaning of 'without prejudice' in a statutory provision. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 22A r 9 | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 22A r 12 | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 59 r 3(2) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 59 rr 7(1) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) O 59 rr 7(2) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Indemnity Costs
- Offer to Settle
- Set-off
- Tenancy Agreement
- Unreasonable Conduct
- Rules of Court
- Consent Judgment
15.2 Keywords
- Indemnity Costs
- Offer to Settle
- Civil Procedure
- Singapore High Court
- Unreasonable Conduct
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Costs | 80 |
| Civil Practice | 75 |
| Summary Judgement | 40 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Costs
- Offer to Settle