Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar v Hadley James Chilton: Setting Aside Leave for Service Out of Jurisdiction
In Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar v Hadley James Chilton, the Singapore High Court considered the defendants' application to set aside leave granted to the plaintiff to serve a writ out of jurisdiction. The plaintiff, as a beneficiary of the estate of Anil Vassudeva Salgaocar, claimed the receivers breached a duty of care. The court, presided over by Aedit Abdullah J, granted the application, finding that the British Virgin Islands (BVI) was the more appropriate forum for the dispute. The court made no order on the application for a declaration that all proceedings in the suit, including the ex parte injunction be set aside. The case involves a claim for breach of duty.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application to set aside leave to serve out of jurisdiction granted; application for a declaration that all proceedings in the suit, including the ex parte injunction be set aside, no order made.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court sets aside leave for service out of jurisdiction in a case involving breach of duty by receivers. The court found BVI to be the more appropriate forum.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar | Plaintiff | Individual | Application to set aside leave to serve out of jurisdiction granted against Plaintiff | Lost | Kanapathi Pillai Nirumalan, Liew Teck Huat, Anand George |
| Hadley James Chilton | Defendant | Individual | Application to set aside leave to serve out of jurisdiction granted in favor of Defendant | Won | Melvin See Hsien Huei, Yeow Guan Wei Joel |
| Laurent Keeble-Buckle | Defendant | Individual | Application to set aside leave to serve out of jurisdiction granted in favor of Defendant | Won | Melvin See Hsien Huei, Yeow Guan Wei Joel |
| Million Dragon Wealth Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Application to set aside leave to serve out of jurisdiction granted in favor of Defendant | Won | Melvin See Hsien Huei, Yeow Guan Wei Joel |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Aedit Abdullah | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Kanapathi Pillai Nirumalan | Niru & Co LLC |
| Liew Teck Huat | Niru & Co LLC |
| Anand George | Niru & Co LLC |
| Melvin See Hsien Huei | Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP |
| Yeow Guan Wei Joel | Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP |
4. Facts
- Plaintiff is the widow of Anil Vassudeva Salgaocar, the sole shareholder and director of Million Dragon Wealth Ltd (MDWL).
- The receivers were appointed for MDWL by the BVI Court in an action commenced by Shanmuga Rethenam.
- Plaintiff claims the receivers breached a duty of care owed to the Estate by acting in bad faith.
- Plaintiff sought an ex parte injunction restraining the receivers from dealing with MDWL's assets.
- The receivers sought recognition of their appointment by the Singapore courts.
- Darsan claims to be the ultimate beneficial owner of MDWL in a separate suit.
5. Formal Citations
- Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar v Hadley James Chilton and others, Suit No 202 of 2017(Summons No 1709 of 2017), [2018] SGHC 87
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Receivers appointed for Million Dragon Wealth Ltd by BVI Court. | |
| Plaintiff commenced Suit 966 seeking to restrain the receivers. | |
| Plaintiff's application to amend statement of claim in Suit 966 allowed in part. | |
| Plaintiff commenced Suit 202. | |
| Plaintiff obtained ex parte injunction restraining the receivers. | |
| Plaintiff obtained leave to serve the writ and statement of claim on the defendants out of jurisdiction. | |
| Plaintiff discontinued Suit 966. | |
| Defendants obtained recognition of their appointment as receivers. | |
| Hearing for Summons No 1709 of 2017. | |
| Plaintiff filed Notice of Appeal. | |
| Decision made to set aside leave to serve out of jurisdiction. |
7. Legal Issues
- Service out of jurisdiction
- Outcome: Leave to serve out of jurisdiction was set aside.
- Category: Procedural
- Forum non conveniens
- Outcome: The court found that the British Virgin Islands (BVI) was the more appropriate forum for the dispute.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Locus standi
- Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff lacked locus standi to bring the claim as the beneficiary of the Estate.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages
- Injunction
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Duty of Care
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zoom Communications Ltd v Broadcast Solutions Pte Ltd | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 500 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that entering an appearance to contest jurisdiction does not amount to submission to jurisdiction. |
| Foss v Harbottle | N/A | No | (1843) 67 ER 189 | England | Cited regarding the rule that a shareholder may not sue for a company’s losses. |
| Bradley Lomas Electrolok Ltd and another v Colt Ventilation East Asia Pte Ltd and others | N/A | Yes | [1999] 3 SLR(R) 1156 | Singapore | Cited for the requirements to establish jurisdiction for service out of jurisdiction. |
| Seaconsar Far East Ltd v Bank Markazi Jomhouri Islami Iran | N/A | Yes | [1993] 3 WLR 756 | N/A | Cited for the requirements to establish jurisdiction for service out of jurisdiction. |
| Manharlal Trikamdas Mody and another v Sumikin Bussan International (HK) Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1161 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of a 'good arguable case' in the context of service out of jurisdiction. |
| Goodwill Enterprise (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v CT Nominees Ltd (in liquidation) and others | N/A | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR(R) 330 | Singapore | Cited regarding the standard of 'serious question to be tried' on the merits of a claim. |
| Wong Moy v Soo Ah Choy | N/A | No | [1996] 3 SLR(R) 27 | Singapore | Cited for the proposition that a beneficiary of an estate is entitled to sue to protect the assets of that estate pending the extraction of grant of letters of administration. |
| Koh Kim Teck v Credit Suisse AG, Singapore Branch | High Court | No | [2015] SGHC 52 | Singapore | Discusses the principle of reverse piercing of the corporate veil. |
| Jhaveri Darsan Jitendra and others v Salgaocar Anil Vassudeva and others | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 24 | Singapore | Cited as case law rejecting the doctrine of reverse piercing. |
| Siskina (owners of cargo lately laden on board) and others v Distos Compania Naviera S.A. | N/A | Yes | [1979] 1 AC 210 | England | Cited for the principle that an interim injunction is not itself a cause of action and cannot, without a pre-existing cause of action, found jurisdiction under O 11 r 1(b). |
| Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Pertamina Energy Trading Ltd and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR(R) | Singapore | Endorsed the holding in The Siskina. |
| Excalibur Group Pte Ltd v Goh Boon Kok | N/A | Yes | [2012] 2 SLR 999 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that leave of court is required before a suit may be commenced against a liquidator. |
| In re Maidstone Palace of Varieties, Limited | N/A | Yes | [1909] 2 Ch 283 | England | Cited for the principle that leave of court is required in order to sue a receiver. |
| JIO Minerals FZC v Mineral Enterprises Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2011] 1 SLR 391 | Singapore | Cited for the test applicable in Singapore for forum non conveniens. |
| Humpuss Sea Transport Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) v PT Humpuss Intermoda Transportasi TBK and another | N/A | Yes | [2016] 5 SLR 1322 | Singapore | Cited for the test applicable in Singapore for forum non conveniens. |
| Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1987] 1 AC 460 | England | Cited for the test applicable in Singapore for forum non conveniens. |
| Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v Bhavani Stores Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR(R) 363 | Singapore | Cited for the burden of proof in an application to set aside leave to serve out of jurisdiction. |
| Peters Roger May v Pinder Lillian Gek Lian | N/A | Yes | [2006] 2 SLR(R) 381 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the inquiry as to the appropriate forum for the dispute is not to be taken in an overly mechanical manner. |
| Beluga Chartering GmbH (in liquidation) and others v Beluga Projects (Singapore) Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and another (deugro (Singapore) Pte Ltd, non-party) | N/A | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 815 | Singapore | Cited regarding common law principles for recognition of foreign receivership. |
| Transniko Pte Ltd v Communication Technology Sdn Bhd | N/A | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR(R) 941 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of full and frank disclosure in an ex parte application for leave to serve out of jurisdiction. |
| Lam Soon (Thailand) v Transpac Capital | High Court | Yes | [1998] SGHC 328 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of full and frank disclosure in an ex parte application for leave to serve out of jurisdiction. |
| The “Vasiliy Golovnin” | N/A | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 994 | Singapore | Cited for the test of materiality in determining what must be disclosed by the applicant. |
| Re: Zetta Jet Pte Ltd and Others | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 16 | Singapore | Cited regarding the obligation to ask for leave to send in further arguments after oral arguments have concluded. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 11 Rule 1 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
| Order 12 Rule 7(1) of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
| Order 21 Rule 1 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Intestate Succession Act (Cap 146) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Service out of jurisdiction
- Forum non conveniens
- Receivership
- Locus standi
- Full and frank disclosure
- Good arguable case
- Reverse piercing
- Beneficiary of estate
15.2 Keywords
- Service out of jurisdiction
- Forum non conveniens
- Receivers
- Breach of duty
- Singapore High Court
- BVI
- British Virgin Islands
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Jurisdiction
- Service Out of Jurisdiction
- Forum Non Conveniens
- Companies Law
- Receivership
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Conflict of Laws
- Companies Law
- Jurisdiction
- Service Out of Jurisdiction
- Forum Non Conveniens
- Lifting Corporate Veil