BNP Paribas v Lam Chi Kin: Summary Judgment Appeal on Loan Facility Margin Requirement
In BNP Paribas Wealth Management v Lam Chi Kin David, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by Lam Chi Kin David against a summary judgment granted to BNP Paribas Wealth Management for sums due under a multi-currency short term loan facility. The court, Woo Bih Li J, dismissed the appeal, finding that Lam Chi Kin David had sufficient time to respond to the bank's demands to cover a margin shortfall and was liable for the outstanding amount of JPY 29,062,179.35.
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
Appeal regarding a summary judgment on a loan facility. The court dismissed the appeal, finding the defendant liable for the outstanding amount.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNP Paribas Wealth Management | Plaintiff, Respondent | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | K Muralidharan Pillai |
Lam Chi Kin David | Defendant, Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Soh Gim Chuan |
3. Judges
Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
---|---|---|
Woo Bih Li | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
Counsel Name | Organization |
---|---|
K Muralidharan Pillai | Rajah &Tann LLP |
Soh Gim Chuan | Soh Wong & Yap |
4. Facts
- PWM granted DL a multi-currency short term loan facility.
- DL was required to maintain a margin requirement.
- On 8 October 2008, DL's liabilities exceeded the loanable value of his portfolio.
- PWM sent telefaxes to DL demanding funds to cover the shortfall.
- DL gave instructions to sell AUD and NZD.
- The remaining NZD position was not executed as the exchange rates were not reached.
- PWM closed DL's NZD/JPY position after DL failed to respond.
5. Formal Citations
- BNP Paribas Wealth Management v Lam Chi Kin David, Suit 875/2008, RA 24/2009, [2009] SGHC 117
6. Timeline
Date | Event |
---|---|
Facility agreement dated | |
Facility agreement executed by DL | |
PWM sent telefax to DL regarding margin shortfall | |
DL gave instructions to sell AUD and NZD | |
PWM unable to contact DL | |
PWM sent telefax to DL requesting instructions | |
PWM closed DL’s NZD/JPY position | |
PWM filed Summons No 5543/2008/F | |
Assistant registrar granted judgment against DL | |
Appeal dismissed with costs | |
Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Contract
- Outcome: The court found that the defendant breached the facility agreement by failing to maintain the margin requirement.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to maintain margin requirement
- Summary Judgment
- Outcome: The court upheld the summary judgment against the defendant.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Banking Litigation
11. Industries
- Financial Services
12. Cited Cases
Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
No cited cases |
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
- Margin Requirement
- Loan Facility
- Telefax
- Shortfall
- Outstanding Liabilities
- Business Day
15.2 Keywords
- Loan Facility
- Margin Requirement
- Summary Judgment
- Banking
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Banking
- Finance
- Loans
17. Areas of Law
- Banking Law
- Contract Law
- Credit and Security