Neville v Andrla: Summary Judgment & Moneylender Act Dispute
Guy Neville sued Dominic Andrla in the High Court of Singapore for sums owing under a loan agreement and a personal guarantee. The Assistant Registrar granted summary judgment in favor of Neville, which Andrla appealed. Belinda Ang Saw Ean J dismissed the appeal, holding that Neville had established a prima facie case and that Andrla's defenses lacked merit. The court found that Neville was not an unlicensed moneylender under the Moneylenders Act and was entitled to rely on the acceleration clause in the loan agreement.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Guy Neville sued Dominic Andrla for sums owed under a loan agreement and personal guarantee. The court dismissed the appeal, finding Neville was not an unlicensed moneylender.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guy Neville | Plaintiff, Respondent | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Gan Kam Yuin, Timothy Quek |
| Dominic Andrla | Defendant, Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Adrian Wee, Rachel Soh |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Gan Kam Yuin | Bih Li & Lee LLP |
| Timothy Quek | Bih Li & Lee LLP |
| Adrian Wee | Characterist LLC |
| Rachel Soh | Characterist LLC |
4. Facts
- The plaintiff sued the defendant for sums owing under a loan agreement and a personal guarantee.
- The Assistant Registrar granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
- The defendant appealed the Assistant Registrar's decision.
- The plaintiff's claim was based on a 2015 loan agreement, which he claimed was varied by a 2017 loan agreement.
- The 2015 loan agreement provided for a loan of GBP 353,978 to be repaid by 30 November 2015, with interest of GBP 24,905.
- The 2017 loan agreement was evidenced by emails agreeing on a new repayment schedule.
- The defendant had only repaid GBP 22,000.
- The plaintiff denied lending money to anyone else other than the defendant.
5. Formal Citations
- Neville, GuyvAndrla, Dominic, Suit No 186 of 2017 (Registrar’s Appeal No 233 of 2017), [2017] SGHC 295
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2015 loan agreement made | |
| Defendant repaid GBP 20,000 | |
| Exchange of emails between plaintiff and defendant (2017 loan agreement) | |
| Defendant proposed to pay GBP 10,000 with balance interest | |
| Defendant proposed to pay GBP 35,000 | |
| Defendant paid GBP 2,000 | |
| Plaintiff sued the defendant | |
| Date of the Defence | |
| Plaintiff applied for summary judgment | |
| Hearing of Registrar’s Appeal No 233 of 2017 | |
| Appeal dismissed | |
| Judgment date |
7. Legal Issues
- Whether the 2017 loan agreement superseded the 2015 loan agreement
- Outcome: The court held that the 2017 loan agreement only varied the repayment schedule of the 2015 loan agreement, and did not supersede it.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether the plaintiff was an unlicensed moneylender under the Moneylenders Act
- Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff was not a moneylender within the meaning of the Moneylenders Act.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2014] 3 SLR 524
- [2003] 4 SLR(R) 338
- [2016] 1 SLR 524
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Summary Judgment
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Debt
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
- Banking and Finance
11. Industries
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sheagar s/o T M Veloo v Belfield International (Hong Kong) Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 524 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the MLA prohibits the business of moneylending rather than the act of lending money and to rebut the presumption of being a moneylender under s 3 MLA. |
| Mak Chik Lun v Loh Kim Her | High Court | Yes | [2003] 4 SLR(R) 338 | Singapore | Cited to define whether a person is carrying on the business of moneylending. |
| Lim Beng Cheng v Lim Ngee Sing | High Court | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 524 | Singapore | Cited to define whether a person is carrying on the business of moneylending. |
| MK (Project Management) Ltd v Baker Marine Energy Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 3 SLR(R) 823 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that where parties enter into two agreements concerning the same substance, the former cannot be construed in isolation from the latter. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Moneylenders Act (Cap 188, 2010 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Loan Agreement
- Personal Guarantee
- Summary Judgment
- Moneylender
- Moneylenders Act
- Acceleration Clause
- Repayment Schedule
- Prima Facie Case
- Triable Issue
15.2 Keywords
- loan agreement
- summary judgment
- moneylender
- singapore
- contract law
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Banking Law
- Contract Law
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Summary Judgment
- Credit and Security
- Money and Moneylenders