Jurong Town Corp v Dauphin Shipyard: Summary Judgment for Land Possession After Lease Expiry

Jurong Town Corporation ("JTC") sued Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd (“Dauphin”) in the High Court of Singapore, seeking vacant possession of land after Dauphin's lease expired. JTC applied for summary judgment, which was granted by the court (Lai Siu Chiu J) on 10 August 2012. Dauphin's defense of proprietary estoppel, based on alleged oral representations of a right to renew the lease, was rejected. The court found Dauphin's conduct inconsistent with such a belief and granted summary judgment in favor of JTC.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Summary judgment granted in favor of the plaintiff.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Jurong Town Corp sought summary judgment for Dauphin Shipyard's failure to vacate land after lease expiry. The court granted judgment for Jurong Town Corp.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Jurong Town CorpPlaintiffStatutory BoardJudgment for PlaintiffWonWilliam Ong, Magdelene Sim
Dauphin Shipyard Pte LtdDefendantCorporationClaim DismissedLostLim Chee San, S Nabham

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Siu ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
William OngAllen & Gledhilll LLP
Magdelene SimAllen & Gledhilll LLP
Lim Chee SanTanLim Partnership
S NabhamS Nabham

4. Facts

  1. Jurong Town Corporation (JTC) is the owner and landlord of the premises located at 23 Tuas Road.
  2. Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd was the lessee of the premises under a lease agreement with JTC.
  3. The initial lease term was for 30 years, from 16 April 1980 to 15 August 2010.
  4. The lease did not contain an option to renew.
  5. Dauphin applied to renew the lease for 20 years, which JTC rejected.
  6. JTC granted Dauphin three extensions of stay on the premises, subject to certain terms.
  7. Dauphin failed to vacate the premises after the final extension expired.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Jurong Town Corp v Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd, Suit No 127 of 2012 (Summons No 2330 of 2012), [2012] SGHC 179

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Lease commenced between Jurong Town Corporation and Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd.
Building Agreement made between the plaintiff and defendant.
Supplementary Agreement made between the plaintiff and defendant.
Jurong Town Corporation sent a Lease Renewal Application Kit to Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd.
Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd applied to renew the Lease for a term of 20 years.
Jurong Town Corporation rejected the application for lease renewal.
Extended Term of lease commenced.
Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd accepted the Extended Term offer.
Extended Term expired; Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd did not vacate the Premises.
Further three months’ extension of stay commenced.
Third and final nine months’ extension of stay commenced.
Letter of Offer for Third Extended Term issued.
Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd accepted the offer and terms of the Third Extended Term.
Third Extended Term expired; Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd failed to vacate the Premises.
Jurong Town Corporation commenced action seeking vacant possession of the Premises.
Dauphin Shipyard Pte Ltd filed its defence.
Jurong Town Corporation applied for summary judgment.
Klint filed the Show Cause affidavit.
Summary judgment granted in favor of the plaintiff.
Decision Date.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Proprietary Estoppel
    • Outcome: The court rejected the defendant's argument of proprietary estoppel, finding their conduct inconsistent with a belief in a right to renew the lease.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Summary Judgment
    • Outcome: The court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the defendant had no bona fide defence and that there were no issues requiring adjudication at trial.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Vacant Possession
  2. Monetary Damages
  3. Double Rent

9. Cause of Actions

  • Holding Over
  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Real Estate Law

11. Industries

  • Construction
  • Shipping

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Associated Development Pte Ltd v Loong Sie Kiong Gerald (administrator of the estate of Chow Cho Poon, deceased) and other suitsHigh CourtYes[2009] 4 SLR(R) 389SingaporeCited for the principles relating to summary judgment under Order 14.
Goh Chok Tong v Chee Soon JuanHigh CourtYes[2003] 3 SLR(R) 32SingaporeCited for the standard to be applied when determining if a defendant has a real or bona fide defence.
Microsoft Corporation v Electro-Wide LimitedN/AYes[1997] FSR 580N/ACited for the principle that the court must look at the complete account of events and assess the credibility of the defence.
Poh Soon Kiat v Desert Palace Inc (trading as Caesars Palace)Court of AppealYes[2010] 1 SLR 1129SingaporeCited for the principle that a defendant may raise defences in his affidavit even if they are not referred to in the pleaded defence in summary judgment proceedings.
Lim Leong Huat v Chip Hup Hup Kee Construction Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2008] 2 SLR(R) 786SingaporeCited as a High Court decision that states a party challenging an Order 14 application is bound to the four corners of its pleading, which is at odds with the Court of Appeal's decision in Poh Soon Kiat.
United States Trading Co Pte Ltd v Ting Boon Aun and anotherHigh CourtYes[2008] 2 SLR(R) 981SingaporeCited as a High Court decision that states a party challenging an Order 14 application is bound to the four corners of its pleading, which is at odds with the Court of Appeal's decision in Poh Soon Kiat.
PMA Credit Opportunities Fund and others v Tantono Tiny (representative of the estate of Lim Susanto, deceased)High CourtYes[2011] 3 SLR 1021SingaporeCited for the suggestion that the Court of Appeal's attention had perhaps not been drawn to the two earlier High Court decisions, and that the position it took might have been different otherwise.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Order 14 of the Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Jurong Town Corporation Act (Cap 150, 1998 Rev Ed)Singapore
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5 2006 Rev Ed)Singapore
Civil Law Act (Cap 43, 1999 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Lease
  • Renewal
  • Proprietary Estoppel
  • Summary Judgment
  • Extended Term
  • Reinstatement Works
  • Vacant Possession

15.2 Keywords

  • lease renewal
  • proprietary estoppel
  • summary judgment
  • land law
  • Jurong Town Corporation
  • Dauphin Shipyard

16. Subjects

  • Landlord and Tenant Law
  • Civil Litigation

17. Areas of Law

  • Land Law
  • Civil Procedure
  • Contract Law
  • Proprietary Estoppel