Holdrich Investment Ltd v Siemens AG: Forum Non Conveniens & Contractual Choice of Law

In Holdrich Investment Ltd v Siemens AG, the Singapore High Court addressed the issue of forum non conveniens. Holdrich Investment Ltd, a Hong Kong company, sued Siemens AG, a German company, for US$2.33 million under a service agreement governed by Singapore law. Siemens AG argued that Germany was the more appropriate forum. The High Court allowed Holdrich Investment Ltd's appeal, finding Singapore to be the more appropriate forum due to the contract's governing law.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court case regarding forum non conveniens in a contract dispute. The court found Singapore to be the more appropriate forum.

1.7 Decision Date

20 December 2009

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Holdrich Investment Ltd	Plaintiff, Respondent	Corporation	Appeal Allowed	Won	N Sreenivasan of Straits Law Practice LLC Collin Choo of Straits Law Practice LLC
Siemens AG	Defendant, Appellant	Corporation	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Gregory Vijayendran of Rajah & Tann LLP Sung Jingyin of Rajah & Tann LLP

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Lee Seiu Kin	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
N Sreenivasan	Straits Law Practice LLC
Collin Choo	Straits Law Practice LLC
Gregory Vijayendran	Rajah & Tann LLP
Sung Jingyin	Rajah & Tann LLP

4. Facts

Holdrich Investment Ltd, a Hong Kong company, sued Siemens AG, a German company.
The dispute arose from a "Service Agreement" for "consultancy services" related to the UMTS Project.
Holdrich was to receive a commission of 2% of the UMTS Project's value.
The contract was governed by Singapore law.
Holdrich claimed US$2.33m for services provided in India and Indonesia.
Siemens argued Germany was the more appropriate forum due to witness location and a German investigation.

5. Formal Citations

Holdrich Investment Ltd v Siemens AG, Suit 679/2008, RA 176/2009, [2009] SGHC 284

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2008-09-23	Writ of summons filed
2008-11-11	Leave obtained to serve writ outside jurisdiction
2009-05-04	Order discharging leave to serve writ outside jurisdiction obtained by defendant
2009-07-17	Counsel's submissions heard
2009-12-21	Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

Forum Non Conveniens
- Outcome: The court held that Singapore was the more appropriate forum.
- Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Rickshaw Investments Ltd v Nicolai Baron von Uexkull	N/A	Yes	[2007] 1 SLR 377	Singapore	Cited as an instance where due regard was given to the parties' choice of Singapore law as the governing law.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2007 Rev Ed)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Forum Non Conveniens
Service Agreement
UMTS Project
Governing Law
Consultancy Services

15.2 Keywords

Forum Non Conveniens
Contract Law
Singapore Law
Siemens
Holdrich

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Natural forum	90
Conflict of Laws	80
Jurisdiction	70
Contract Law	60
International Commercial Law	50

16. Subjects

Conflict of Laws
Contract Law
Civil Procedure