Chan Siew Lee Jannie v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd: Setting Aside Statutory Demand
In Chan Siew Lee Jannie v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd, the High Court of Singapore dismissed Jannie Chan Siew Lee's application to extend time to set aside a statutory demand and to set aside the statutory demand issued by Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. The case concerned a loan default by Timor Global LDA, for which Chan was a guarantor. The court held that the statutory demand was not defective for failing to list security offered by a third party and that the extension of time should not be granted.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiff's applications dismissed with costs.
1.3 Case Type
Bankruptcy
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court dismissed Jannie Chan's application to set aside a statutory demand by Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd, relating to a loan default.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jannie Chan Siew Lee | Plaintiff | Individual | Applications dismissed | Lost | Eugene Thuraisingam, Jerrie Tan |
| Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment for Defendant | Won | Chou Sean Yu, Aw Wen Ni, Liang Hanting |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Kan Ting Chiu | Senior Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Eugene Thuraisingam | Eugene Thuraisingam LLP |
| Jerrie Tan | Eugene Thuraisingam LLP |
| Chou Sean Yu | WongPartnership LLP |
| Aw Wen Ni | WongPartnership LLP |
| Liang Hanting | WongPartnership LLP |
4. Facts
- The Plaintiff is a debtor to the Defendant.
- The Defendant is a bank incorporated in Australia.
- The Defendant made a loan to Timor Global LDA (TGL).
- The Plaintiff is a shareholder and director of TGL.
- The Plaintiff executed a personal guarantee in favour of the Defendant for TGL's loan.
- TGL defaulted on the loan.
- The Defendant obtained judgment against the Plaintiff as a guarantor.
- The Defendant served a Statutory Demand on the Plaintiff.
5. Formal Citations
- Chan Siew Lee Jannie v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd, Originating Summons (Bankruptcy) No 2 of 2015, [2015] SGHC 157
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Statutory Demand served on the Plaintiff | |
| Negotiations between parties broke down | |
| Plaintiff instituted proceedings to set aside the Statutory Demand | |
| Applications dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Setting Aside Statutory Demand
- Outcome: The court held that the Statutory Demand was not defective as it did not need to specify security offered by a third party.
- Category: Substantive
- Extension of Time to Apply to Set Aside Statutory Demand
- Outcome: The court held that the Plaintiff had not made a case for time to be extended.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside of Statutory Demand
- Extension of time to set aside Statutory Demand
9. Cause of Actions
- Enforcement of Guarantee
- Debt Recovery
10. Practice Areas
- Bankruptcy Litigation
11. Industries
- Banking
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Re Loh Lee Keow and another, ex parte Keppel TatLee Bank Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2000] 3 SLR(R) 283 | Singapore | Cited for the interpretation of 'security' in rr 94(5) and 98(2) of the Bankruptcy Rules, holding that it refers to security on the property of the debtor in the bankruptcy proceedings. |
| Sia Leng Yuen v HKR Properties Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2001] 3 SLR(R) 587 | Singapore | Cited to affirm the interpretation of 'security' in rr 94(5) and 98(2) of the Bankruptcy Rules as security provided by the debtor, not by third parties. |
| White v Davenham Trust Ltd | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] EWCA Civ 747 | England and Wales | Cited to support the interpretation that security contemplated by r 6.5(4)(c) of the Insolvency Rules 1986 (UK) was the security provided by the debtor. |
| Dorsey James Michael v World Sport Group Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 3 SLR 354 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the purposive approach to statutory interpretation takes precedence over common law principles. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Bankruptcy Rules (Cap 20, R 1, 2006 Rev Ed) |
| Bankruptcy Rules (Cap 20, R 1, 2006 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Bankruptcy Rules | Singapore |
| Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 2002 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Statutory Demand
- Personal Guarantee
- Bankruptcy
- Security
- Debtor
- Creditor
- Guarantor
15.2 Keywords
- Bankruptcy
- Statutory Demand
- Guarantee
- Security
- Debtor
- Creditor
16. Subjects
- Bankruptcy
- Guarantees
- Banking Law
17. Areas of Law
- Bankruptcy Law
- Statutory Interpretation