DP Shipbuilding v Owner of LONG BRIGHT: Judicial Sale of Vessel & Plaintiff's Right to Release
In DP Shipbuilding and Engineering Pte Ltd v Owner and/or Demise Charterer of the vessel “LONG BRIGHT”, the Singapore High Court addressed whether a plaintiff can release an arrested vessel and halt its judicial sale after bids have been received, following a settlement with an intervener. The court held that the plaintiff must apply for a discharge of the sale order before releasing the vessel, but exercised its discretion to discharge the sale order in this case. The court considered the interests of all parties with claims against the vessel.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Order for appraisement and sale discharged, and release of the vessel allowed.
1.3 Case Type
Admiralty
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case concerning the judicial sale of the vessel LONG BRIGHT and whether the plaintiff can release the vessel after settlement.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DP Shipbuilding and Engineering Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Settlement reached with 1st intervener | Settled | |
| Owner and/or Demise Charterer of the vessel “LONG BRIGHT” | Defendant | Other | Order for appraisement and sale discharged | Neutral | |
| Hangzhou Chuantao Investment Management Partnership (Limited Partnership) | 1st Intervener | Limited Liability Partnership | Supported discharge of sale order | Neutral | |
| Wu Hao and 9 others | 2nd to 11th Interveners | Individual | Opposed discharge of sale order | Lost | |
| SAL Shipping Pte Ltd | Caveator | Corporation | Sale order discharged | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Pang Khang Chau | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- DP Shipbuilding claimed approximately S$300,000 for wharfage and related charges.
- Hangzhou Chuantao claimed an outstanding loan of RMB 200 million as mortgagee.
- Wu Hao and 9 others claimed approximately USD 295,000 for unpaid wages.
- SAL Shipping claimed approximately S$50,000 as local agent for the Vessel.
- Plaintiff applied for judgment in default of appearance and an order for appraisement and sale of the Vessel.
- Plaintiff reached a settlement with the 1st intervener on 17 August 2018.
- Five potential buyers had submitted bids for the Vessel before the plaintiff applied for discharge of the sale order.
5. Formal Citations
- The “Long Bright”, Admiralty in Rem No 31 of 2018(Summons No 3828 of 2018), [2018] SGHC 216
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Hearing before Belinda Ang J; Plaintiff withdraws application for judgment in default. | |
| Hearing before Belinda Ang J; Court grants order for sale of the Vessel pendente lite. | |
| Plaintiff files the commission for appraisement and sale. | |
| Sheriff advertises the Vessel for sale. | |
| Plaintiff reaches a settlement with the 1st intervener. | |
| Plaintiff files an application for discharge of the sale order and for release of the Vessel. | |
| Deadline for submission of bids. | |
| Hearing of the application. | |
| Decision given by the court. | |
| Reasons provided by the court. |
7. Legal Issues
- Judicial Sale of Vessel
- Outcome: Court held that the plaintiff must apply for a discharge of the sale order before releasing the vessel.
- Category: Substantive
- Release of Arrested Vessel
- Outcome: Court held that a plaintiff is not entitled to release the vessel as of right after a sale order has been made.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Order for sale of vessel
- Payment of outstanding amounts
9. Cause of Actions
- Claim for wharfage and related charges
- Claim for outstanding loan
- Claim for unpaid wages
10. Practice Areas
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Judicial Sale
11. Industries
- Shipping
- Shipbuilding
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The “Sahand” and other applications | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2011] 2 SLR 1093 | Singapore | Discusses considerations for discharge of sale orders and release of vessels. |
| The “Acrux” | Not Available | Yes | [1961] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 471 | England and Wales | Dealt with the discharge of a sale order and release of a vessel where the amount offered as security could only meet some of the claims. |
| The “Turtle Bay” | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 615 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court has entire control over the sale process to protect the interests of all persons with in rem claims against the vessel. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 70, rule 12(2) of the Rules of Court |
| Order 70 r 21(2)(a) of the Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, Section 80, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Judicial sale
- Sale pendente lite
- Arrested vessel
- Caveat against release
- Discharge of sale order
- Action in rem
- Intervener
- Wharfage
- Mortgagee
- Unpaid wages
15.2 Keywords
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Judicial Sale
- Vessel
- Release
- Singapore
- LONG BRIGHT
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Admiralty and Maritime Law | 90 |
| Action in rem | 70 |
| Civil Procedure | 60 |
| Shipping Disputes | 40 |
| Contract Law | 30 |
| Arbitration | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Civil Procedure
- Practice and Procedure