Seraya Energy v Denka Advantech: Costs & Disbursements in Electricity Contract Dispute

In a supplementary judgment, the High Court of Singapore addressed the issue of costs and disbursements following a dispute between Seraya Energy Pte Ltd (SE) and Denka Advantech Private Limited (Denka) and Denka Singapore Private Limited (DSPL) over electricity contracts. The court, presided over by Woo Bih Li J, ordered Seraya Energy to pay Denka 90% of the costs of the action, calculated on a standard basis from the date Denka made an offer to settle. The court considered the complexity of the case, the amount claimed, and Denka's conduct in resisting liability for breach of contract. The court also awarded Denka disbursements incurred from the date the offer to settle was served.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Seraya Energy to pay Denka Advantech 90% of the costs of the action from the date of the offer to settle.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Supplementary Judgment on Costs and Disbursements

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Supplementary judgment on costs and disbursements in a dispute over electricity contracts. Denka was awarded 90% of costs from the date of their offer to settle.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Seraya Energy Pte LtdPlaintiff, Defendant in CounterclaimCorporationCosts to be paid to Denka AdvantechLost
Denka Advantech Private LimitedDefendant, Plaintiff in CounterclaimCorporationCosts awardedWon
Denka Singapore Private LimitedDefendant, Plaintiff in CounterclaimCorporationNeutralNeutral
YTL PowerSeraya Pte LimitedThird PartyCorporationNeutralNeutral

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Woo Bih LiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Chan Kah Keen MelvinTSMP Law Corporation
Koh Li QunTSMP Law Corporation
Kelvin (Xu Liqun)TSMP Law Corporation
Nguyen Vu LanTSMP Law Corporation
Yip Li MingRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Tay Twan Lip PhilipRajah & Tann Singapore LLP

4. Facts

  1. Seraya Energy (SE) sued Denka Advantech (Denka) and Denka Singapore (DSPL) in two separate suits.
  2. Denka made an offer to settle (OTS) on 31 October 2016, which remained open for five months and was withdrawn on 31 March 2017.
  3. The trial commenced on 7 November 2017.
  4. The court determined the liability and quantum in two prior judgments.
  5. SE was entitled to $1,850,000 from bank guarantees and $77,911.72 from DAPL.
  6. SE was liable to pay DSPL $1,097.72.
  7. The net amount SE was entitled to was $1,926,814.
  8. Under the OTS, SE would have received $1,850,000 and $792,450, totaling $2,642,450.
  9. The difference between the OTS and the judgment was $715,636, about 37% of the judgment amount.
  10. Denka sought $2m as costs on an indemnity basis and $1.2m on a standard basis.
  11. SE sought $1.2m as costs against Denka on a standard basis.
  12. The trial lasted 12 days.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Seraya Energy Pte Ltd v Denka Advantech Pte Ltd and another suit, Suit Nos 1328 and 1329 of 2014, [2019] SGHC 100

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Consolidation of suits pursuant to Order of Court
First Judgment issued
Second Judgment issued
Denka made an offer to settle
Offer to settle withdrawn
First day of trial
Initial decision that each party was to bear its own costs
Judgment reserved
Judgment reserved
Supplementary Judgment on Costs and Disbursements issued
Writ was filed
Aggregate sum received from three bank guarantees

7. Legal Issues

  1. Costs
    • Outcome: Denka Advantech was awarded 90% of the costs of the action from the date of the offer to settle.
    • Category: Procedural
  2. Offer to Settle
    • Outcome: The court considered the offer to settle in determining the allocation of costs.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. No remedies sought

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Energy

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Seraya Energy Pte Ltd v Denka Advantech Pte Ltd and another suit (YTL PowerSeraya Pte Ltd, third party)High CourtYes[2019] SGHC 02SingaporeSets out the background to the action.
Seraya Energy Pte Ltd v Denka Advantech Pte Ltd and another suit (YTL PowerSeraya Pte Ltd, third party)High CourtYes[2019] SGHC 18SingaporeDetermined the extent of the liability and quantum.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O 22A r 9(3) of the Rules of Court
O 22A r 9(5) of the Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Offer to settle
  • Costs
  • Disbursements
  • Indemnity basis
  • Standard basis
  • Liquidated damages
  • Electricity contracts

15.2 Keywords

  • costs
  • disbursements
  • offer to settle
  • electricity contracts
  • Singapore High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Costs95
Offer to Settle80
Civil Procedure75
Civil Practice75
Contract Law50
Breach of Contract40
Summary Judgement30

16. Subjects

  • Costs and Disbursements
  • Offer to Settle
  • Contractual Dispute