Elbow Holdings Pte Ltd v Marina Bay Sands Pte Ltd: Injunctions & Breach of Contract Dispute

Elbow Holdings Pte Ltd, a restaurateur, sued Marina Bay Sands Pte Ltd in the High Court of Singapore, alleging misrepresentation and breach of a collateral contract related to a lease agreement. Marina Bay Sands counterclaimed for arrears in rent. The court, presided over by Choo Han Teck J, dismissed Elbow Holdings' application for relief against forfeiture and discharged the interim injunction, citing Elbow Holdings' failure to keep up with payment obligations. The decision was made on 9 May 2016.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application dismissed. Interim injunction discharged.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Elbow Holdings sues Marina Bay Sands for misrepresentation and breach of contract. The court dismisses Elbow Holdings' application for relief against forfeiture.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
MARINA BAY SANDS PTE LTDDefendantCorporationCounterclaimNeutral
Elbow Holdings Pte LtdPlaintiffCorporationApplication dismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Elbow Holdings leased premises from Marina Bay Sands to operate a restaurant.
  2. The lease agreement was for six years, expiring on 2 December 2016.
  3. Elbow Holdings sued Marina Bay Sands for alleged misrepresentation and breach of contract.
  4. Marina Bay Sands counterclaimed for arrears in rent.
  5. Marina Bay Sands re-entered and re-possessed the premises on 26 February 2016 due to non-payment of rent.
  6. The plaintiff failed to comply with multiple interim payment orders and cost orders.
  7. The plaintiff has been late in making payments to the defendant for utilities charges on several occasions.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Elbow Holdings Pte Ltd v Marina Bay Sands Pte Ltd, Suit No 954 of 2012, [2016] SGHC 90

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Lease agreement signed for six years
Suit No 954 of 2012 filed
Suit No 702 of 2013 commenced
Suit No 553 of 2014 commenced
Defendant re-entered and re-possessed the premises
Plaintiff filed application for relief against forfeiture
Injunction granted on conditions
Plaintiff filed second application for an extension of the injunction
Injunction continued with additional conditions
Judgment reserved
Application dismissed. Interim injunction discharged.
Trial scheduled to begin
Trial scheduled to end

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court did not make a final determination on the breach of contract claim, but the plaintiff's failure to meet payment obligations contributed to the dismissal of their application.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Relief against Forfeiture
    • Outcome: The court dismissed the plaintiff's application for relief against forfeiture.
    • Category: Procedural
  3. Injunction
    • Outcome: The court discharged the interim injunction.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Injunction
  2. Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Misrepresentation
  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Hospitality
  • Food and Beverage

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
No cited cases

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Lease Agreement
  • Forfeiture
  • Injunction
  • Misrepresentation
  • Collateral Contract
  • Arrears in Rent
  • Turnover Rent
  • Re-entry
  • Re-possession

15.2 Keywords

  • Lease
  • Restaurant
  • Misrepresentation
  • Breach of Contract
  • Injunction
  • Forfeiture
  • Singapore
  • Commercial Dispute

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Contract Law
  • Landlord and Tenant Law
  • Civil Procedure
  • Injunctions