The "Genius Star II": Setting Aside Warrant of Arrest for Non-Disclosure of Material Facts in Admiralty Claim
The High Court of Singapore heard an application by Wisdom Marine Lines SA, the defendant and owner of the vessel "Genius Star II", to set aside a warrant of arrest issued against the vessel. Impa Marina Pte Ltd, the plaintiff, had obtained the warrant based on a claim for S$9,101.43 for goods and materials supplied. The defendant argued that the plaintiff failed to disclose material facts regarding a dispute over a 2% discount. The court, presided over by Assistant Registrar Ruth Yeo, allowed the application, setting aside the warrant of arrest due to the plaintiff's non-disclosure of material facts.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Warrant of Arrest set aside on the ground of material non-disclosure.
1.3 Case Type
Admiralty
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court set aside the warrant of arrest of the vessel "Genius Star II" due to the plaintiff's non-disclosure of material facts regarding a payment dispute.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The "Genius Star II" | Defendant | Other | Application allowed | Won | |
| Wisdom Marine Lines SA | Defendant, Applicant | Corporation | Application allowed | Won | |
| Impa Marina Pte Ltd | Plaintiff, Respondent | Corporation | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Ruth Yeo | Assistant Registrar | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Prem Gurbani | Gurbani & Co. |
| Hussainar bin K. Abdul Aziz | H.A. & Chung Partnership |
4. Facts
- Plaintiff filed a Writ of Summons claiming S$9,101.43 for goods and materials supplied to the vessel.
- Plaintiff obtained a Warrant of Arrest against the vessel.
- Defendant applied to set aside the Warrant of Arrest based on non-disclosure of material facts.
- Defendant argued Plaintiff failed to disclose emails regarding a 2% discount agreement.
- Defendant sent a Credit Note Request email stating they would pay upon receiving the discount.
- Plaintiff's affidavit only included one email demanding payment, omitting prior correspondence.
- The court found that the Plaintiff failed to disclose material facts and made a misstatement in the affidavit.
5. Formal Citations
- The “Genius Star II”, Admiralty in Rem No 224 of 2013, [2013] SGHCR 23
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Defendant's manager requested a discount from Plaintiff. | |
| Plaintiff agreed to a 2% discount for complete order. | |
| Defendant sent a purchase order to purchase the goods and materials. | |
| Plaintiff rendered a Statement of Account. | |
| Defendant queried Plaintiff about late payment interest and requested a credit note for the 2% discount. | |
| Plaintiff replied stating it was entitled to charge late payment interest. | |
| Plaintiff sent email demanding payment. | |
| Plaintiff filed Writ of Summons and obtained Warrant of Arrest. | |
| Vessel arrested. | |
| Defendant provided security and vessel was released. | |
| Defendant filed application to set aside Warrant of Arrest. | |
| Hearing on application to set aside Warrant of Arrest. | |
| Further arguments on the issue of whether the alleged non-disclosure in question was material. | |
| Court allowed the application to set aside. | |
| Full grounds of decision issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Non-disclosure of Material Facts
- Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff's non-disclosure of material facts in the Arrest Affidavit warranted setting aside the Warrant of Arrest.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to disclose Discount Request emails
- Failure to disclose Credit Note Request email
- Misstatement in affidavit
- Related Cases:
- [2003] 3 SLR 362
- [2008] 4 SLR(R) 994
- [2012] 4 SLR 546
- [1993] 2 SLR 717
- Wrongful Arrest
- Outcome: The court declined to award damages for wrongful arrest, finding that the arrest was not brought with so little foundation as to imply malice or gross negligence on the part of the Plaintiff.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2008] 4 SLR(R) 994
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside of Warrant of Arrest
- Damages for Wrongful Arrest
9. Cause of Actions
- Claim for goods and materials supplied
- Wrongful Arrest
10. Practice Areas
- Admiralty
- Commercial Litigation
- Shipping Litigation
11. Industries
- Shipping
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The “Rainbow Spring” | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2003] 3 SLR 362 | Singapore | Cited as authority for the principle that non-disclosure of material facts is an independent ground for setting aside a warrant of arrest in Singapore. |
| The “Vasiliy Golovnin” | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 994 | Singapore | Cited for the two aspects to consider regarding material non-disclosure: content and scope of disclosure, and the threshold of disclosure. Also cited for the approach to be adopted in assessing damages for wrongful arrest. |
| The “Bunga Melati 5” | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 546 | Singapore | Cited as authority for the principle that non-disclosure of material facts is an independent ground for setting aside a warrant of arrest in Singapore. |
| The “Damavand” | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 2 SLR 717 | Singapore | Cited for the test of materiality: whether the fact is relevant to the making of the decision whether or not to issue the warrant of arrest. |
| Tay Long Kee Impex Pte Ltd v Tan Beng Huwah | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR(R) 786 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an applicant for an ex parte injunction is under an absolute obligation to make a full and frank disclosure of all material facts and circumstances. |
| Siporex Trade SA v Comdel Commodities Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1986] 2 Lloyd's Rep 428 | N/A | Cited for the principle that the applicant must identify the crucial points for and against the application, and not rely on general statements and the mere exhibiting of numerous documents. |
| The “Eagle Prestige” | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2010] 3 SLR 294 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that it is possible to apply to set aside the warrant of arrest because either there was a lack of in personam liability or there was non-disclosure of material facts. |
| Re a debtor (No 75n of 1982, Warrington), ex parte the debtor v National Westminster Bank plc | N/A | Yes | [1983] 3 All ER 545 | N/A | Cited for the principle that the plaintiff should disclose any facts which the plaintiff knows of which might tell in the defendant’s favour |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Warrant of Arrest
- Material Non-Disclosure
- Full and Frank Disclosure
- Discount Request
- Credit Note Request
- Admiralty in Rem
- Wrongful Arrest
15.2 Keywords
- Admiralty
- Warrant of Arrest
- Non-disclosure
- Material Facts
- Shipping
- Singapore
- Genius Star II
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Admiralty and Maritime Law | 90 |
| Arrest of Vessel | 90 |
| Non-disclosure of material facts | 80 |
| Shipping Law | 70 |
| Wrongful arrest | 60 |
| Civil Procedure | 40 |
| Evidence | 30 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
| Estoppel | 20 |
| Breach of Contract | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Admiralty
- Civil Procedure
- Shipping
- Warrants of Arrest