Diamond Exchange of Singapore v Singapore Diamond Exchange: Security for Costs under Societies Act
The High Court of Singapore heard an application by Singapore Diamond Exchange Pte Ltd for security for costs against the plaintiff, Diamond Exchange of Singapore, in a passing off suit. The defendant argued that the plaintiff, a not-for-profit society, might be unable to pay costs if the defense was successful. The court, presided over by AR Eunice Chua, dismissed the application, finding insufficient evidence to believe the plaintiff would be unable to pay costs and holding that even if the condition was met, the court would not have exercised its discretion to grant security for costs. The claim was for passing off.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application for security for costs dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Application for security of costs against Diamond Exchange of Singapore, a not-for-profit society, was dismissed. The court found insufficient evidence to believe the society couldn't pay costs.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diamond Exchange of Singapore | Plaintiff | Association | Application for security for costs dismissed | Won | Lim Ying Sin Daniel |
| Singapore Diamond Exchange Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Application for security for costs dismissed | Lost | Wong Siew Hong, Poonaam Bai |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Eunice Chua | Assistant Registrar | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Lim Ying Sin Daniel | Joyce A Tan & Partners |
| Wong Siew Hong | Eldan Law LLP |
| Poonaam Bai | Eldan Law LLP |
4. Facts
- Diamond Exchange of Singapore is a trade association registered as a society since 1976.
- The plaintiff commenced suit against the defendant for passing off.
- The defendant applied for security for costs against the plaintiff.
- The plaintiff's membership has declined from 73 members in 1987 to 43 in 2011.
- The plaintiff's income is primarily from member subscriptions.
- The plaintiff was late in filing its annual returns with the Registry of Societies.
5. Formal Citations
- Diamond Exchange of Singapore v Singapore Diamond Exchange Pte Ltd, Suit No 984 of 2012; Summons No 1281 of 2013, [2013] SGHCR 10
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Diamond Exchange of Singapore registered as a society. | |
| Plaintiff commenced suit against the defendant for passing off. | |
| Defendant filed an application to seek security in the sum of $35,000 against the plaintiff for costs. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Security for Costs
- Outcome: The court dismissed the application for security for costs, finding insufficient evidence to believe the plaintiff would be unable to pay costs.
- Category: Procedural
- Passing Off
- Outcome: The court did not rule on the merits of the passing off claim, as the application concerned security for costs.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Injunction
- Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Passing Off
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Diamond Trading
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creative Elegance Sdn Bhd v Puay Kim Seng and Anor | High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR(R) 112 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that once the condition in s 36(1) of the Societies Act is satisfied, the court’s discretion is invoked and the court will consider all the circumstances to decide whether it is just to order the plaintiff to provide security for costs. |
| Frantonios Marine Services Pte Ltd and another v Kay Swee Tuan | High Court | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 224 | Singapore | Cited for the factors the court would consider in determining a company's ability to pay costs, but distinguished in the present case. |
| Ho Pak Kim Realty Co Pte Ltd v Revitech Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2008] SGHC 230 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that dereliction of duty to file audited accounts can constitute circumstantial evidence sufficient to meet the condition for credible testimony. |
| Chen Cheng and another v Central Christian Church and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR(R) 806 | Singapore | Cited to support the point that the Societies Act had vested registered societies with sufficient legal personality to sue and be sued. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Societies Act (Cap 311, 1985 Rev Ed) s 36(1) | Singapore |
| Trade Marks Act (Cap 332, 2005 Rev Ed) s 55 | Singapore |
| Societies Act s 35(d) | Singapore |
| Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) s 388(1) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Security for Costs
- Societies Act
- Passing Off
- Trade Association
- Not-for-profit Organisation
15.2 Keywords
- Security for Costs
- Societies Act
- Passing Off
- Trade Association
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Societies
- Trade Marks
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Societies Act
- Trade Marks Act