Ong Eng Kae v Rupesh Kumar: Specific Performance & Solicitor's Personal Costs

Ong Eng Kae and another sought specific performance of an Option to Purchase against Rupesh Kumar in the High Court of Singapore. The court granted the application for specific performance on 13 January 2015. Subsequently, the plaintiffs applied for a personal cost order against Rupesh's solicitor, Mr. Gunaseelan. The court dismissed the application for a personal cost order, finding no lack of reasonable competence or expedition on the part of the solicitor. The decision was delivered on 25 June 2015.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiffs' application for a personal cost order against the first defendant's solicitor was dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court considered specific performance of an Option to Purchase and a personal cost order against the defendant's solicitor. The application for personal costs was dismissed.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ong Eng KaePlaintiffIndividualApplication for personal cost order dismissedLostVijai Parwani
Rupesh KumarDefendantIndividualCosts of OS 979/2014 ordered out of Rupesh’s estateNeutralGunaseelan S E Selvadurai
Official AssigneeOtherGovernment Agency

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Aedit AbdullahJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Vijai ParwaniParwani Law LLC
Gunaseelan S E SelvaduraiS. Gunaseelan & Partners

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiffs sought specific performance of an Option to Purchase for a property owned by Rupesh.
  2. Rupesh was adjudged a bankrupt on 18 September 2014.
  3. Plaintiffs applied for a personal cost order against Rupesh's solicitor, Mr. Gunaseelan.
  4. The Official Assignee's consent for Mr. Gunaseelan to act for Rupesh was conditional on a third-party undertaking.
  5. The third-party undertaking was not furnished in a timely manner.
  6. The Official Assignee requested Mr Gunaseelan to represent Rupesh in the proceedings on its behalf.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ong Eng Kae and another v Rupesh Kumar and others, Originating Summons No 979 of 2014, [2015] SGHC 163

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Option to Purchase entered into between the Plaintiffs and the 1st Defendant.
Original completion date.
Rupesh was adjudged a bankrupt.
Plaintiffs commenced OS 979/2014.
Mr Gunaseelan wrote to the Official Assignee seeking consent to represent Rupesh.
The Official Assignee emailed the Plaintiffs’ solicitors informing him that the Official Assignee had authorised Mr Gunaseelan to act for Rupesh.
The Official Assignee clarified its previous email to Mr Gunaseelan that such consent was given on the basis that a third party would be bearing all costs incurred in this matter.
First Pre-Trial Conference held.
The Official Assignee sent another email requesting for a signed indemnity bearing all costs incurred in OS 979/2014.
The Official Assignee sent another email to Mr Gunaseelan requesting him to appear in the next Pre-Trial Conference scheduled on 25 November 2014 on its behalf.
Pre-Trial Conference held.
Final Pre-Trial Conference held.
Mr Gunaseelan requested a template copy of the deed of indemnity from the Official Assignee.
The Official Assignee obliged Mr Gunaseelan's request for a template copy of the deed of indemnity.
OS 979/2014 came before the court.
Oral judgment granted in favour of the Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs applied for their costs to be borne personally by Mr Gunaseelan.
Signed copy of the deed of indemnity arrived at the Official Assignee’s office.
Court ordered the property to be transferred to the Plaintiffs upon payment of the balance sum under the Option to Purchase.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Personal Costs Order Against Solicitor
    • Outcome: The court refused to order personal costs against the solicitor, finding no lack of reasonable competence or expedition.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to conduct proceedings with reasonable competence
      • Failure to conduct proceedings with reasonable expedition
  2. Specific Performance
    • Outcome: The court granted the application for specific performance.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Specific Performance
  2. Personal Cost Order

9. Cause of Actions

  • Specific Performance

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation
  • Insolvency
  • Contractual Disputes

11. Industries

  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Tan King Hiang v United Engineers (Singapore) Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2005] 3 SLR(R) 529SingaporeCited for the principle that a solicitor acting on behalf of a bankrupt may be made personally liable for costs if they fail to obtain the sanction of the Official Assignee.
Standard Chartered Bank v Loh Chong Yong ThomasN/AYes[2010] 2 SLR 569SingaporeCited regarding the Official Assignee's power to grant retrospective sanction.
Re Wilson Lovatt & Sons LtdN/AYes[1977] 1 All ER 274N/ACited regarding the ranking of costs as the Official Assignee's expenses in the distribution of an estate.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 131(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Option to Purchase
  • Specific Performance
  • Personal Cost Order
  • Official Assignee
  • Bankruptcy
  • Third Party Undertaking
  • Sanction
  • Reasonable Competence
  • Reasonable Expedition

15.2 Keywords

  • Specific Performance
  • Personal Costs
  • Bankruptcy
  • Solicitor
  • Official Assignee
  • Option to Purchase

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Bankruptcy
  • Contract Law
  • Costs

17. Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Bankruptcy Law
  • Contract Law