Ong Swee Huat v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd: Bankruptcy and Statutory Demand

Ong Swee Huat appealed to the High Court of Singapore against the decision of the Assistant Registrar to dismiss his application to set aside a statutory demand issued by Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) for a debt of $28,678.74 incurred through credit facilities. The High Court, presided over by Choo Han Teck J, dismissed the appeal, finding that Ong Swee Huat continued to use the credit facility even after the account was transferred to RBS and ANZ, and had made payments to both banks.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to be taxed on an indemnity basis.

1.3 Case Type

Bankruptcy

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal against order to dismiss the appellant's application to set aside the statutory demand. The court dismissed the appeal, finding it without merit.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Australia and New Zealand Banking Group LimitedRespondentCorporationAppeal dismissedWon
Ong Swee HuatAppellantIndividualAppeal dismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Thng Hwei-LinYeo-Leong & Peh LLC
Daphne LaiYeo-Leong & Peh LLC

4. Facts

  1. Appellant applied for a credit line facility with ABN AMRO in 2001.
  2. ABN AMRO was acquired by RBS, and the Appellant’s account was transferred to RBS.
  3. Appellant’s account was transferred to ANZ on 15 May 2010 due to a Scheme of Arrangement.
  4. ANZ claimed the Appellant defaulted in his payments.
  5. ANZ issued a statutory demand against the Appellant on 22 June 2016.
  6. Appellant continued to draw on the credit facility after his account was transferred to RBS.
  7. Appellant made payments to RBS and ANZ on various occasions.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ong Swee Huat v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd, Originating Summons (Bankruptcy) No 51 of 2016, [2016] SGHC 262

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Appellant applied for a credit line facility with ABN AMRO Bank N.V.
Appellant’s account was transferred to ANZ due to a Scheme of Arrangement.
Letter of demand was issued and sent to the Appellant’s address.
Statutory demand was issued against the Appellant.
Statutory demand was personally served on the Appellant.
Appellant filed action to set aside the statutory demand.
Assistant Registrar dismissed the appellant’s application to set aside the statutory demand.
Appellant filed the present appeal.
Judgment reserved.
Judgment delivered.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Setting aside of statutory demand
    • Outcome: The court dismissed the appeal to set aside the statutory demand.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Existence of contract between debtor and creditor
    • Outcome: The court found that the appellant continued to use the credit facility and made payments, thus implying a contract.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Setting aside of statutory demand

9. Cause of Actions

  • Debt Claim
  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Bankruptcy
  • Debt Recovery

11. Industries

  • Banking

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Bankruptcy Act (Cap 20)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Statutory demand
  • Credit facility
  • Bankruptcy
  • Scheme of Arrangement

15.2 Keywords

  • Bankruptcy
  • Statutory Demand
  • Credit Facility
  • Singapore
  • ANZ Bank

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Bankruptcy90
Insolvency Law90
Contract Law50
Debt Recovery40

16. Subjects

  • Bankruptcy
  • Banking
  • Insolvency