Basil Anthony Herman v Premier Security: Defamation Retrial Ordered, Costs Review

In Basil Anthony Herman v Premier Security Co-Operative Ltd and others, the High Court of Singapore reviewed the taxed costs awarded to Basil Anthony Herman, the applicant/defendant, after the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial in the District Court for a defamation claim. The initial High Court trial resulted in a judgment for the respondents/plaintiffs, but the appeal was allowed. The applicant sought a review of the Assistant Registrar's decision on costs, particularly concerning the disallowed sum for a Costs Draftsman. The court dismissed the application, upholding the Assistant Registrar's assessment.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Defamation case where the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial. The High Court reviews the taxed costs awarded to the applicant.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Basil Anthony HermanApplicant, DefendantIndividualApplication dismissedLostSinga Retnam, Kertar Singh, Anil Singh
Premier Security Co-Operative LtdRespondents, PlaintiffsCorporationApplication dismissedWonAdrian Wong Soon Peng, Teo Siu Qiu

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Singa RetnamKertar & Co
Kertar SinghKertar & Co
Anil SinghKertar & Co
Adrian Wong Soon PengRajah & Tann LLP
Teo Siu QiuRajah & Tann LLP

4. Facts

  1. The applicant was sued for defamation.
  2. The High Court ruled the remarks were defamatory but granted leave to defend.
  3. The trial judge gave judgment to the respondents and awarded damages totalling $150,000.
  4. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a retrial in the District Court.
  5. The applicant was awarded half costs for the trial below.
  6. The applicant sought a review of the taxed costs awarded by the Assistant Registrar.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Lin Jian Wei and another v Lim Eng Hock Peter, , [2011] 3 SLR 1052

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Bill of Cost No 89 of 2011
Summons No 3771 of 2011
Decision Date
Judgment reserved
High Court ruled that the remarks made by him which formed the subject of the suit were defamatory but granted the applicant leave to defend
Trial lasting nine days
Trial judge gave judgment to the respondents and awarded damages totalling $150,000
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a retrial in the District Court

7. Legal Issues

  1. Assessment of Costs
    • Outcome: The court upheld the assistant registrar's assessment of costs, finding no wrongful exercise of discretion.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Proportionality principle
      • Reasonableness of costs
      • Discretion of the court
    • Related Cases:
      • [2011] 3 SLR 1052

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Review of Taxed Costs

9. Cause of Actions

  • Defamation

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation
  • Appeals

11. Industries

  • Legal Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Lin Jian Wei and another v Lim Eng Hock PeterCourt of AppealYes[2011] 3 SLR 1052SingaporeCited for the proportionality principle in assessment of costs.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Defamation
  • Costs
  • Taxed Costs
  • Retrial
  • Proportionality Principle
  • Assistant Registrar
  • Bill of Costs
  • Discretion
  • Review

15.2 Keywords

  • defamation
  • costs
  • retrial
  • Singapore
  • High Court
  • appeal
  • legal fees

16. Subjects

  • Civil Litigation
  • Defamation
  • Legal Costs

17. Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Defamation Law
  • Cost Review