Breezeway Overseas v UBS AG: E-Discovery, Keyword Searches, and Post-Search Review

In Breezeway Overseas Ltd and another v UBS AG and others, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal regarding disputed keyword search terms in the electronic discovery process. The plaintiffs, Breezeway Overseas Ltd and Mr. Vasanmal Murli, sued UBS AG and others for misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duties, gross negligence, wilful misconduct, and breach of contract related to leveraged bonds. The court allowed the appeal in part, modifying the time period for the keyword search term "protest" and clarifying the bank's right to conduct post-search reviews for relevance, privilege, and confidentiality.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed in Part

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding keyword search terms in e-discovery. The court allowed the appeal in part, clarifying post-search review rights.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
UBS AGDefendant, RespondentCorporationAppeal allowed in partPartial
Breezeway Overseas LtdPlaintiffCorporationAppeal allowed in partPartial
Vasanmal MurliPlaintiffIndividualAppeal allowed in partPartial
Susan AbrahamDefendantIndividualNeutralNeutral
Vikrant KanyalDefendantIndividualNeutralNeutral

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lee Seiu KinJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Tan Shou MinDrew & Napier LLC
Freddy LimLee & Lee
Charmaine ChanLegis Point LLC

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiffs alleged misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duties, gross negligence, wilful misconduct, and breach of contract by the Bank.
  2. The plaintiffs claimed they relied on the Bank’s representations when taking loans to purchase leveraged bonds.
  3. The plaintiffs alleged the Bank represented the loans as fixed loans and/or fixed to maturity.
  4. The plaintiffs claimed they were not informed about the need to provide collateral to secure the loans.
  5. The Bank issued margin calls on the plaintiffs’ account in March 2009, requiring them to raise large sums of money.
  6. The plaintiffs protested against the Bank’s decisions to reduce the loan amounts and make the margin calls.
  7. The appeal concerned nine of the ten keywords that the SAR allowed for the e-discovery process.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Breezeway Overseas Ltd and another v UBS AG and others, Suit No 114 of 2010 (Registrar's Appeal No 412 of 2011), [2012] SGHC 170
  2. Breezeway Overseas Ltd v UBS AG, , [2012] SGHC 41

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Suits No 112 of 2010 and 114 of 2010 filed
Plaintiffs’ draft e-discovery protocol dated
First hearing on SUM 2443/2011
Second hearing on SUM 2443/2011
Supreme Court Practice Direction No 3 of 2009 amended
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. E-Discovery
    • Outcome: The court clarified the permissibility of post court-sanctioned search reviews for relevance, privilege, and confidentiality.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Keyword searches
      • Post court-sanctioned search reviews
      • Relevance of search results
      • Privilege
      • Confidentiality
    • Related Cases:
      • [2012] SGHC 41
      • [2011] SGHC 61

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Misrepresentation
  • Breach of Fiduciary Duty
  • Gross Negligence
  • Wilful Misconduct
  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Financial Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Breezeway Overseas Ltd v UBS AGHigh CourtYes[2012] SGHC 41SingaporeRefers to the grounds of the SAR’s decision regarding disputed keyword search terms.
Robin Duane Littau v Astrata (Asia Pacific) Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2011] SGHC 61SingaporeDiscusses preliminary keyword searches and the interpretation of search results as prima facie relevant.
Sanae Achar v Sci-Gen LtdNAYes[2011] 3 SLR 967SingaporeDiscusses the discovery framework under O 24 of the Rules of Court and the tension between justice and efficiency in the discovery process.
Nichia Corp v Argos LtdEngland and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division)Yes[2007] EWCA Civ 741England and WalesDiscusses the balance between achieving perfect justice and ensuring efficiency in the legal system.
Surface Stone Pte Ltd v Tay Seng Leon and anotherHigh CourtYes[2011] SGHC 223SingaporeAcknowledges the problems caused by the burgeoning volume of discoverable electronic documents.
Deutsche Bank AG v Chang Tse Wen and othersHigh CourtYes[2010] SGHC 125SingaporeStates that the e-discovery PD does not set out to change the law on discovery.
Gavin Goodale and ors v The Ministry of Justice and othersHigh Court of JusticeYes[2010] EWHC B40 (QB)England and WalesContemplates the conduct of general discovery in stages.
Digicel (St Lucia) Ltd v Cable & Wireless PlcHigh Court of JusticeYes[2008] EWHC 2522 (Ch)England and WalesJustifies the attitude that not every stone should be left unturned by considerations of proportionality.
The Compagnie Financiere et Commerciale du Pacifique v The Pruvian Guano CoQueen's Bench DivisionYes(1882) 11 QBD 55England and WalesRefers to documents that would lead to a train of inquiry.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O 24 of the Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • E-discovery
  • Keyword search
  • Post court-sanctioned search review
  • Relevance
  • Privilege
  • Confidentiality
  • Margin call
  • Leveraged bonds
  • Mailbox Emails
  • Personal Network Profiles
  • Instant Messaging Records

15.2 Keywords

  • E-discovery
  • keyword searches
  • post-search review
  • relevance
  • privilege
  • confidentiality
  • Singapore
  • High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Electronic Discovery90
Civil Practice70
Contract Law60
Fiduciary Duties50
Misrepresentation50
Banking40
Summary Judgement30
Business Litigation20
Arbitration20

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Electronic Discovery
  • Banking
  • Finance