Heince Tombak Simanjuntak v Paulus Tannos: Recognition of Indonesian Bankruptcy Orders in Singapore
The Singapore High Court heard an application by Heince Tombak Simanjuntak, Hardiansyah, and William E Daniel for the recognition of Indonesian bankruptcy orders against Paulus Tannos, Lina Rawung, Pauline Tannos, and Catherine Tannos. The applicants, appointed as receivers and administrators under Indonesian law, sought to administer the respondents' property in Singapore. The respondents applied to set aside the recognition order, arguing fraud and breach of natural justice. The High Court granted full recognition to the Indonesian Bankruptcy Orders, empowering the applicants to administer the respondents’ property in Singapore, subject to certain conditions.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Recognition granted to the Indonesian Bankruptcy Orders. The respondents' application for setting aside the recognition order was dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Insolvency
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court considers the recognition of Indonesian bankruptcy orders against Paulus Tannos and others, focusing on common law requirements.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paulus Tannos | Respondent | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost | |
| Heince Tombak Simanjuntak | Applicant | Individual | Application granted | Won | |
| Hardiansyah | Applicant | Individual | Application granted | Won | |
| William E. Daniel | Applicant | Individual | Application granted | Won | |
| Lina Rawung | Respondent | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost | |
| Pauline Tannos | Respondent | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost | |
| Catherine Tannos | Respondent | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Aedit Abdullah | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The applicants are receivers and administrators appointed under Indonesian law.
- The respondents are subject to Indonesian bankruptcy orders.
- The Indonesian bankruptcy orders include a moratorium on debt repayment, a bankruptcy order, and the appointment of an additional receiver.
- The applicants sought recognition of the Indonesian bankruptcy orders in Singapore to administer the respondents' property.
- The respondents contested the recognition, alleging fraud and breach of natural justice.
- The Indonesian Supreme Court overturned lower court decisions that had found the underlying personal guarantees to be invalid.
- The respondents participated in the Indonesian proceedings through legal counsel.
5. Formal Citations
- Heince Tombak Simanjuntak and others v Paulus Tannos and others, Originating Summons No 71 of 2018, [2019] SGHC 216
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Moratorium on debt repayment (PKPU) ordered in Indonesia | |
| Bankruptcy order against the Respondents issued in Indonesia | |
| Additional receiver and administrator appointed in Indonesia | |
| Applicants' second affidavit filed | |
| Applicants’ submissions filed | |
| First Respondent’s closing submissions filed | |
| Hearing date | |
| First Respondent’s submissions filed | |
| First Respondent’s affidavit filed | |
| Applicants’ affidavit filed | |
| First Respondent’s affidavit filed | |
| Applicants’ submissions filed | |
| Hearing date | |
| Affidavit of Paulus Sinatra Wijaya filed | |
| Hearing date | |
| Hearing date | |
| Hearing date | |
| Judgment date |
7. Legal Issues
- Recognition of Foreign Bankruptcy Orders
- Outcome: The court granted full recognition to the Indonesian Bankruptcy Orders, finding that the common law requirements for recognition were met and no defenses applied.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Finality of foreign judgment
- Jurisdiction of foreign court
- Defenses to recognition (fraud, breach of natural justice)
- Breach of Natural Justice
- Outcome: The court found that there was no breach of natural justice as the respondents had adequate notice of the proceedings and participated in them.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Insufficient notice of proceedings
- Fraud
- Outcome: The court found no evidence of fraud in relation to the conduct of the proceedings. Allegations of fraud related to underlying personal guarantees were deemed an attempt to re-litigate issues already adjudicated upon.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Fraudulent procurement of personal guarantees
- Extrinsic fraud
8. Remedies Sought
- Recognition of Indonesian Bankruptcy Orders
- Setting Aside of Recognition Order
- Empowerment to administer respondents’ property in Singapore
9. Cause of Actions
- Recognition of Foreign Judgment
- Setting Aside of Recognition Order
10. Practice Areas
- Cross-Border Insolvency
- Recognition of Foreign Judgments
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Re Opti-medix Ltd (in liquidation) and another matter | High Court | Yes | [2016] 4 SLR 312 | Singapore | Cited as a case in which foreign corporate insolvency proceedings were recognised on the basis of common law. |
| Re Taisoo Suk (as foreign representative of Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd) | High Court | Yes | [2016] 5 SLR 787 | Singapore | Cited as a case in which foreign corporate insolvency proceedings were recognised on the basis of common law. |
| Re Gulf Pacific Shipping Ltd (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) and others | High Court | Yes | [2016] SGHC 287 | Singapore | Cited as a case in which foreign corporate insolvency proceedings were recognised on the basis of common law. |
| Beluga Chartering GmbH (in liquidation) and others v Beluga Projects (Singapore) Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and another (deugro (Singapore) Pte Ltd, non-party) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 815 | Singapore | Cited for endorsing the modified universalist approach to recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings. |
| Humpuss Sea Transport Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) v PT Humpuss Intermoda Transportasi TBK and another | High Court | Yes | [2016] 5 SLR 1322 | Singapore | Cited for refusing to recognise an Indonesian court’s approval of a composition plan on the basis that it was not final and conclusive and that the Indonesian court lacked jurisdiction. |
| Giant Light Metal Technology (Kunshan) Co Ltd v Aksa Far East Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 545 | Singapore | Cited for reiterating the criteria for recognition of foreign judgments, namely finality, jurisdiction, and absence of defenses. |
| The “Bunga Melati 5” | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 546 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a judgment is final and conclusive on the merits if it cannot be varied, re-opened, or set aside by the court that delivered it. |
| Manharlal Trikamdas Mody and another v Sumikin Bussan International (HK) Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1161 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a pending appeal does not necessarily mean that a judgment is not final and conclusive. |
| The Royal Bank of Scotland NV (formerly known as ABN Amro Bank NV) and others v TT International Ltd (nTan Corporate Advisory Pte Ltd and others, other parties) and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 1104 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish recognition from res judicata. |
| Henderson v Henderson | N/A | Yes | Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100 | N/A | Cited to define the “extended” doctrine of res judicata. |
| WSG Nimbus Pte Ltd v Board of Control for Cricket in Sri Lanka | High Court | Yes | [2002] 1 SLR(R) 1088 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that submission to jurisdiction involves waiving objection to jurisdiction by taking a step in the proceedings. |
| Hong Pian Tee v Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2002] 1 SLR(R) 515 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of extrinsic fraud. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Companies (Amendment) Act 2017 (No 15 of 2017) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Recognition
- Bankruptcy Orders
- Foreign Judgment
- Insolvency
- Breach of Natural Justice
- Fraud
- Personal Guarantee
- PKPU
- Modified Universalism
- Extrinsic Fraud
15.2 Keywords
- Recognition
- Bankruptcy
- Foreign Judgment
- Singapore
- Indonesia
- Insolvency
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Recognition of Foreign Judgments | 80 |
| Bankruptcy | 75 |
| Cross-Border Insolvency | 70 |
| Foreign Law | 70 |
| International Law | 60 |
| Civil Procedure | 50 |
| Arbitration | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Conflict of Laws
- Insolvency
- Bankruptcy
- Recognition of Foreign Judgments