Ramindo Sukses Perkasa v Sim Kwang Oo: Striking Out for Contempt of Court Orders

In Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte Ltd v Sim Kwang Oo, the Singapore High Court addressed the striking out of Originating Summons No 463 of 2012 due to Ramindo's non-compliance with court orders. The dispute arose from a business fallout between Tham Hai Lee (THL) and Sim Kwang Oo (SKO) involving vessel mortgages. SKO, as a co-guarantor, paid United Overseas Bank (UOB) the debts owed by Barlian Shipping & Trading Pte Ltd (BST) in full and stepped into UOB’s shoes in relation to the bank’s rights as BST’s creditor and the mortgagee of the OS 463 vessels. The court found Ramindo, controlled by THL, had deliberately breached injunction orders by concealing vessel identities and providing misleading information. Consequently, the court struck out Ramindo's claim, emphasizing the importance of upholding court authority.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Originating Summons No 463 of 2012 was struck out.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Written Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court struck out Ramindo Sukses Perkasa's claim due to blatant breaches of injunction orders and misleading the court.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte LtdPlaintiff, AppellantCorporationClaim Struck OutDismissedK Muralitherapany, Edward Koh
Sim Kwang OoDefendant, RespondentIndividualApplication AllowedWonThio Ying Ying, Tan Yeow Hiang, Lim Yao Jun

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
K MuralitherapanyJoseph Tan Jude Benny LLP
Edward KohJoseph Tan Jude Benny LLP
Thio Ying YingKelvin Chia Partnership
Tan Yeow HiangKelvin Chia Partnership
Lim Yao JunKelvin Chia Partnership

4. Facts

  1. THL and SKO were former business partners in BST.
  2. BST obtained loans from UOB secured by mortgages over vessels, including the OS 463 vessels.
  3. THL and SKO provided personal guarantees to UOB for the UOB loans.
  4. SKO paid UOB the debts owed by BST in full and became the mortgagee by subrogation.
  5. Ramindo filed OS 463 to redeem the mortgages over the OS 463 vessels.
  6. SKO sought an interim injunction to restrain Ramindo from dealing with the OS 463 vessels.
  7. Ramindo changed the names, registration country, and ownership of the OS 463 vessels without SKO's consent.
  8. Ramindo mortgaged the Jovan 1 to BNI as security for loans to PTLL.
  9. Ramindo deployed the Ocean Dream and the Barlian 2501 using the names and trading certificates of other vessels.
  10. Ramindo failed to comply with the March Injunction Order and the August Order.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte Ltd v Sim Kwang Oo, , [2015] SGHC 80
  2. Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte Ltd v Sim Kwang Oo, 463 of 2012, Originating Summons No 463 of 2012
  3. Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte Ltd v Sim Kwang Oo, 5762 of 2013, Summons No 5762 of 2013
  4. Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte Ltd v Sim Kwang Oo, 174 of 2013, Civil Appeal No 174 of 2013
  5. Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte Ltd v Sim Kwang Oo, 185 of 2013, Summons No 185 of 2013
  6. Ramindo Sukses Perkasa Pte Ltd v Sim Kwang Oo, 3584 of 2013, Summons No 3584 of 2013
  7. Sim Kwang Oo v United Overseas Bank, 881 of 2011, Originating Summons No 881 of 2011
  8. Sim Kwang Oo v Tham Hai Lee, 127 of 2011, CWU 127 of 2011
  9. Sim Kwang Oo v Tham Hai Lee, 118 of 2012, OS 118 of 2012

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Facility Agreement dated.
Supplemental Deed dated.
Facility Agreement dated.
Second Supplemental Deed dated.
THL and SKO agreed to divide certain assets of BST.
UOB arrested the QSA 79.
SKO paid UOB the debts owed by BST in full.
The Barlian 2501 was registered in the Kiribati Ship Registry.
The Ocean Dream was registered in the Kiribati Ship Register.
The Ocean Dream and the Barlian 2501 were mortgaged by PTLL to BNI.
SKO filed Originating Summons No 881 of 2011 against UOB.
The Jovan 1 was registered in the Kiribati Ship Registry.
The GL certificate of Ocean Dream expired.
The Jovan 1 was deregistered from the Kiribati Ship Registry.
The Jovan 1 was registered in the Batam Ship Register as “Jovan 1 ex Barlian 233”.
The Barlian 2501’s class certificate was withdrawn.
The Jovan 1 was renamed “LL 2511” and was registered in the Indonesian Ship Register at Jakarta as “LL 2511”.
SKO obtained confirmation of her status as the mortgagee by subrogation of UOB’s rights and interests in the OS 463 vessels.
Ramindo filed OS 463 to redeem the mortgages over the OS 463 vessels.
The Jovan 1 was mortgaged to BNI.
The transfers of mortgage to SKO were registered at the Singapore Registry of Ships.
The Barlian 2501 called at Singapore (under tow by the Ocean Dream).
The Barlian 2501 was deregistered from the Kiribati Ship Registry.
The Ocean Dream was renamed “LL Ocean Dream” and was registered in the Jakarta Ship Register as “LL Ocean Dream”.
The Ocean Dream was deregistered from the Kiribati Ship Registry.
The Jovan 1’s class certificate from GL expired.
The Barlian 2501 called at Singapore (under tow by the Ocean Dream).
Registration process for both vessels had yet to be completed.
The Barlian 2501 called at Singapore (under tow by the Ocean Dream).
The vessels were brought to PTLL Shipyard in Batam.
The Ocean Dream and Barlian 2501 were deployed for trading using the names and trading certificates of the LL Jaguarr 02 and LL 2515 respectively.
Sea Certificate of “LL 2515 eks LL 2414” was issued.
The R&M works for the Ocean Dream were completed.
Interim injunction was granted in favour of SKO.
KCP wrote to TRC requesting Ramindo to provide the OS 463 vessels’ class certificates.
SKO learnt that the Ocean Dream and the Barlian 2501 were sailing under different names since January/February 2013.
THL’s written inquiry to the DGST as to the registration status of the vessels bearing the names “LL Ocean Dream” and “Barlian 2501”.
DGST’s reply stating that the said vessel “are not registered in [the] Indonesian Ship Register”.
KCP wrote to TRC requesting inspection of the Barlian 2501 and the Ocean Dream.
SKO filed SUM 3584.
TRC wrote to KCP seeking SKO’s consent to change the names and the registration country of the OS 463 vessels.
THL’s affidavit was filed.
The August Order was granted.
The Ocean Dream and Barlian 2501 were deployed for trading using the names and trading certificates of the LL Jaguarr 02 and LL 2515 respectively.
THL filed an affidavit to disclose its dealings with the OS 463 vessels since 15 June 2011.
KCP wrote to Ramindo’s current solicitors, Joseph Tan Jude Benny LLP, on 4 October 2013 and called on Ramindo to reinstate the OS 463 vessels’ GL class certificates.
SUM 5762 was filed to strike out OS 463.
The court allowed SKO’s application in SUM 5762 and struck out OS 463.
SKO’s counterclaim was subsequently listed for hearing.
SKO was directed to file a separate action in respect of her counterclaim.
Closing submissions for the related proceedings were concluded.
Decision Date.
Decision on CWU 127 of 2011 and OS 118 of 2012 will be handed down.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Non-compliance with Court Orders
    • Outcome: The court held that Ramindo's non-compliance with the March Injunction Order and the August Order was contumacious and justified striking out OS 463.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Breach of Injunction Order
      • Failure to Comply with Disclosure Order
      • Misleading the Court
    • Related Cases:
      • [2011] VSC 355
      • [2009] 25 VR 160
      • [1990] 1 Ch 65
      • [2008] WASCA 243
      • [2005] 3 SLR(R) 60
      • [2008] 4 SLR (R) 1
      • [2013] 3 SLR 1179
  2. Breach of Deed of Covenants
    • Outcome: The court found that Ramindo acted contrary to the terms of the Deed of Covenants by making changes to the vessels without SKO's knowledge or consent.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Changing Vessel Names
      • Changing Vessel Registration Country
      • Changing Vessel Ownership
      • Mortgaging Vessels Without Consent
  3. Equity of Redemption
    • Outcome: The court found that SKO was not legally obliged to accept full payment of BST’s debt from Ramindo.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Clog on Equity of Redemption
      • Unjustifiable Refusal of Redemption Offer

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Redemption of Mortgages
  2. Striking Out of Claim

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Fraud
  • Failure to comply with court order

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Shipping
  • Injunctions

11. Industries

  • Shipping

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Cocoon Data Holdings Pty Ltd v K2M3 LLCSupreme Court of VictoriaYes[2011] VSC 355AustraliaCited for circumstances warranting striking out an action for failure to comply with an injunction.
Slaveski v State of Victoria and OthersSupreme Court of VictoriaYes[2009] 25 VR 160AustraliaCited for circumstances in which the court might exercise its inherent jurisdiction to dismiss or stay proceedings.
Derby & Co Ltd v WeldonCourt of AppealYes[1990] 1 Ch 65England and WalesCited for the possibility of barring the right to defend of a defendant who breached a Mareva injunction.
Mariotti v Wanneroo North Pty LtdCourt of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western AustraliaYes[2008] WASCA 243AustraliaCited for the principle that a litigant who deliberately disobeys a court order is not allowed to proceed.
OCM Opportunities Fund II, LP and others v Burhan Uray (alias Wong Ming Kiong) and othersHigh Court of SingaporeYes[2005] 3 SLR(R) 60SingaporeCited for the principle that parties are entitled to have court orders respected and obeyed.
Alliance Management SA v Pendleton Lane P and another and another suitHigh Court of SingaporeYes[2008] 4 SLR (R) 1SingaporeCited for the principle that a total disregard of court orders warrants a striking out order.
Mitora Pte Ltd v Agritrade International (Pte) LtdCourt of Appeal of SingaporeYes[2013] 3 SLR 1179SingaporeCited for the principle that a court has the discretion to strike out when it is in the public interest to do so.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
s 99 of the Merchant Shipping Act (Cap 179, 1996 Rev Ed)Singapore
Law of the Republic of Indonesia No 17/2008 on ShippingIndonesia

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Mortgagee
  • Mortgagor
  • Subrogation
  • Injunction
  • Contempt of Court
  • Class Certificate
  • Ship Registry
  • Deed of Covenants
  • Beneficial Ownership
  • Dual-Flagged

15.2 Keywords

  • Mortgage
  • Shipping
  • Injunction
  • Contempt
  • Vessels
  • Singapore
  • Court Order
  • Striking Out

16. Subjects

  • Shipping
  • Mortgages
  • Civil Procedure
  • Contempt of Court

17. Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Injunctions
  • Shipping Law
  • Mortgages