Diora-Ace Ltd v Management Corporation: Enforcing Notice under BMSMA to Prevent Incurring Legal Costs
Diora-Ace Ltd and others, as plaintiffs, filed an originating summons against Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3661 and others in the High Court of Singapore, seeking a declaration and injunction to enforce a notice issued under the Building Management and Strata Maintenance Act (BMSMA) to prevent the MCST from incurring legal costs in defending a previous suit. Hoo Sheau Peng JC dismissed the plaintiffs' application, finding that the notice was issued in bad faith and was an attempt to stifle the MCST's right to defend itself. The plaintiffs were ordered to pay costs.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiffs’ application dismissed with costs.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Plaintiffs sought to enforce a notice to prevent the MCST from incurring legal costs. The court dismissed the application, finding the notice was issued in bad faith.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diora-Ace Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| I.Contemporary Living Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3661 | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment for Defendant | Won | |
| Heng Chih Yang | Defendant | Individual | Judgment for Defendant | Won | |
| Joel Chang Chung Yhow | Defendant | Individual | Judgment for Defendant | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Hoo Sheau Peng | JC | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Lim Chee San | TanLim Partnership |
| Cheo Chai Beng Johnny | Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC |
4. Facts
- Plaintiffs owned more than one-third of the lots in the Development.
- Plaintiffs issued a notice under s 58(3) of the BMSMA to prevent the MCST from incurring legal costs.
- The notice was issued on the same day as the filing of OS 392/2014.
- The MCST engaged Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC as its counsel.
- Plaintiffs sought a declaration and an injunction to enforce the notice.
- The Defendants challenged the validity of the Notice on the basis that it was issued in bad faith and made to stifle the MCST’s defence in OS 392/2014.
5. Formal Citations
- Diora-Ace Ltd and others v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3661 and others, Originating Summons 994 of 2014, [2015] SGHC 89
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiffs filed Originating Summons No 392 of 2014 | |
| Plaintiffs issued notice under s 58(3) of the BMSMA | |
| MCST engaged Cheo Yeoh & Associates LLC | |
| I.Contemporary sent a notice to the MCST requesting an inspection of financial documents | |
| Two further reminders were sent | |
| Two further reminders were sent | |
| MCST replied notifying I.Contemporary that they would accede to its request on 20 November 2014 | |
| I.Contemporary’s then solicitors, Richard Lim & Co, sent a letter to the MCST demanding the immediate production of the financial documents requested for | |
| Authorised representative of I.Contemporary was granted access to the documents | |
| Plaintiffs commenced this action | |
| Plaintiffs withdrew the first prayer | |
| First hearing of the present case | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Enforcement of Notice under s 58(3) of BMSMA
- Outcome: The court held that the notice was issued in bad faith and should not be enforced.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Validity of notice
- Good faith requirement
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the council of the MCST acted in breach of s 58(3) of the BMSMA
- Injunction to prohibit the council of the MCST from acting in breach of s 58(3) of the BMSMA
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of s 58(3) of the Building Maintenance and Strata Maintenance Act
- Application for Declaratory Relief
- Application for Injunctive Relief
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
- Strata Management
11. Industries
- Real Estate
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diora-Ace Limited and others v The Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 3661 and another | High Court | Yes | [2015] SGHC 88 | Singapore | Sets out the grounds of decision in relation to the original dispute between the parties. |
| Lark Lounge and Nite Club Pte Ltd v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 1420 | High Court | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR(R) 945 | Singapore | Relied upon by the defendants to argue that a notice made under s 58(3) of the BMSMA should be made in good faith and for a good reason. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Building Management and Strata Maintenance Act (Cap 30C, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Building Management and Strata Maintenance Act
- Management Corporation Strata Title
- Notice under s 58(3)
- Good faith
- Legal costs
- Subsidiary proprietors
- Council of the MCST
15.2 Keywords
- strata
- management corporation
- BMSMA
- legal costs
- injunction
- declaration
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Strata Title Law | 90 |
| Construction Law | 10 |
| Civil Litigation | 5 |
16. Subjects
- Strata Title
- Building Management
- Civil Procedure