Lam Hwa Engineering v Yang Qiang: Recovery of Travel Expenses for Foreign Litigant

In Lam Hwa Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd v Yang Qiang, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal regarding the decision of the District Judge to allow the Respondent, Yang Qiang, a foreign worker, to recover his travel expenses to Singapore as part of disbursements in a personal injury claim against the Appellant, Lam Hwa Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Respondent is entitled to recover his travel expenses reasonably incurred, as he was a necessary witness in the case.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed; the Respondent is entitled to recover his travel expenses reasonably incurred.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court held that a foreign litigant can recover travel expenses as disbursements if they are necessary for attending court as a witness.

1.7 Decision Date

19 February 2013

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Lam Hwa Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd	Appellant	Corporation	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Niru Pillai
Yang Qiang	Respondent	Individual	Entitled to Recover Travel Expenses	Won	Belinder Kaur Nijar

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Lai Siu Chiu	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Niru Pillai	Global Law Alliance LLC
Belinder Kaur Nijar	Hoh Law Corporation

4. Facts

The Respondent, a foreign Chinese worker, filed a personal injury claim against the Appellant.
The action was settled between both parties, with a final judgment dated 25 July 2011 being entered against the Appellant by consent.
The Respondent filed a bill of costs on 21 October 2011 to be taxed by a Deputy Registrar.
The bill of costs included the Respondent’s return air tickets to Shanghai, totalling $1,113.00, and expenses incurred in China to travel to and from the Pudong International Airport in Shanghai, totalling $95.00.
The Deputy Registrar disallowed Section 3 of the Bill, which contained the Respondent’s claim for disbursements.
The District Judge reversed the Deputy Registrar’s decision and held that the Respondent was entitled to recover his travel expenses.
The Respondent was forced to leave Singapore because he was injured and could no longer work.

5. Formal Citations

Lam Hwa Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd v Yang Qiang, Registrar's Appeal from Subordinate Courts No 32 of 2012, [2013] SGHC 42
Yang Qiang v Lam Hwa Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd, , [2012] SGDC 31

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2011-07-25	Final judgment entered against the Appellant by consent.
2011-10-21	Respondent filed a bill of costs.
2011-11-18	Deputy Registrar disallowed Section 3 of the Bill.
2012-02-06	District Judge reversed the Deputy Registrar’s decision.
2013-02-20	Judgment reserved.
2013-02-20	High Court dismissed the appeal.

7. Legal Issues

Recovery of Travel Expenses
- Outcome: The High Court held that the Respondent is entitled to recover his travel expenses reasonably incurred.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2012] SGDC 31
  - [1998] 2 SLR(R) 576
  - (1884) 13 QBD 872
  - [2008] 3 SLR(R) 189
  - [1914] 2 KB 577
  - [1952] P 332
  - [1954] P 468
  - [2002] SASC 234
  - (1994) 179 CLR 403
  - [2003] VSCA 18
  - (1972) 3 SASR 532
  - [2002] SASC 160
  - (1996) 42 Alta LR (3d) 132
  - (1991) 39 CPR (3d) 90
  - (1987) 15 CPR (3d) 201
  - (2006) 69 CPR (4th)
  - (2010) FC 718

8. Remedies Sought

Disbursements
Costs

9. Cause of Actions

Personal Injury

10. Practice Areas

Litigation
Personal Injury Claims

11. Industries

Construction

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Yang Qiang v Lam Hwa Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd	District Court	Yes	[2012] SGDC 31	Singapore	The High Court was hearing an appeal against the decision of the District Judge in this case.
Rajabali Jumabhoy and Others v Ameerali R Jumabhoy and Others	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1998] 2 SLR(R) 576	Singapore	Cited by the Appellant to argue that a litigant is not entitled to claim for his attendance in court. The High Court disagreed with the Appellant’s interpretation.
The London Scottish Benefit Society v Chorley, Crawford and Chester	English Court of Appeal	Yes	(1884) 13 QBD 872	England	Cited for the general rule that only a solicitor is entitled to claim for his professional costs for time spent in attending court proceedings.
Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa and others	High Court	Yes	[2008] 3 SLR(R) 189	Singapore	Cited to clarify that disbursements refer to expenses actually incurred and paid out.
Harbin v Gordon	English Court of Appeal	Yes	[1914] 2 KB 577	England	Cited for the proposition that a litigant is entitled to an allowance as a witness like any other witness.
Gibbs v Gibbs	N/A	Yes	[1952] P 332	England	Cited for the proposition that expenses are normally allowable as costs on taxation.
Ammar v Ammar	N/A	Yes	[1954] P 468	England	Cited for the point that the expenses of the husband attending court are allowable on taxation.
Rowan v Cornwall (No 6)	Supreme Court of South Australia	Yes	[2002] SASC 234	Australia	Cited for the proposition that a litigant is entitled to an allowance as a witness like any other witness.
Cachia v Hanes	High Court of Australia	Yes	(1994) 179 CLR 403	Australia	Cited to suggest that a litigant’s time and travel expenses are unrecoverable in principle. However, the High Court clarified that a litigant who qualifies as a witness is entitled to the ordinary witness’s fees.
CGU Workers Compensation (Vic) Ltd v Rees	Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria	Yes	[2003] VSCA 18	Australia	Cited for the point that a party's actual travel expenses, save in the capacity of a witness, are not claimable as party and party costs.
Willing v Hollobone	Supreme Court of South Australia	Yes	(1972) 3 SASR 532	Australia	Cited for the point that a party appearing in person is entitled to out-of-pocket expenses including travelling expenses to get to and from the court.
Rowan v Cornwall (No 5)	Supreme Court of South Australia	Yes	[2002] SASC 160	Australia	Cited for the point that the plaintiff was entitled to be reimbursed for the cost of airfares as the costs of the action.
Dilcon Constructors Ltd v ANC Developments Inc	N/A	Yes	(1996) 42 Alta LR (3d) 132	Canada	Cited for the point that party and party costs are not intended to compensate a successful party for its own personal or internal costs for attending to the litigation.
Beloit Canada Ltd v Valmet-Dominion Inc	Federal Court of Appeal of Canada	Yes	(1991) 39 CPR (3d) 90	Canada	Cited for the point that a party and party award of costs does not embrace the travelling and living expenses of the successful party in instructing counsel and attending the hearing.
Bayliner Marine Corp v Doral Boats Ltd	Federal Court of Appeal of Canada	Yes	(1987) 15 CPR (3d) 201	Canada	Cited for the point that the separate corporate personality permits a witness to be taxed as a witness including his travel expenses for examination for discovery and trial, but not for any attendance for the purposes of giving instructions to counsel.
Halford v Seed Hawk Inc	Federal Court of Canada	Yes	(2006) 69 CPR (4th)	Canada	Cited for the point that travel disbursements are recoverable for a party as witness at his own discovery and to testify at trial, but not to attend to give instructions.
Pizzaro v Canada (Attorney General)	Federal Court of Canada	Yes	(2010) FC 718	Canada	Cited for the point that travel disbursements are recoverable for a party as witness at his own discovery and to testify at trial, but not to attend to give instructions.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

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

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Travel Expenses
Disbursements
Bill of Costs
Standard Basis
Foreign Worker
Personal Injury Claim
Costs Reasonably Incurred

15.2 Keywords

Travel Expenses
Disbursements
Foreign Litigant
Personal Injury
Singapore High Court

16. Subjects

Civil Procedure
Costs
Personal Injury

17. Areas of Law

Civil Procedure
Personal Injury Law
Costs