Sinfeng Marine v Taylor: Winding Up, Creditors' Liquidators & Examination Orders

Sinfeng Marine Services Pte Ltd, Cosco Petroleum Pte Ltd, and Costank (S) Pte Ltd appealed against orders for document production sought by Joshua James Taylor and Yit Chee Wah, the liquidators of Coastal Oil Singapore Pte Ltd, which was undergoing creditors’ voluntary winding up. The Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore, on 9 October 2020, allowed the appeals, setting aside the Production Orders, holding that the liquidators could not invoke the court’s statutory powers of examination without first making an application under s 310(1)(b) of the Companies Act.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeals allowed and Production Orders set aside.

1.3 Case Type

Insolvency

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding orders for document production in a creditors' voluntary winding up. The court examined the scope of statutory powers.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Tay Yong KwangJudge of AppealNo
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes
Woo Bih LiJudgeNo

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Coastal Oil Singapore Pte Ltd was placed in creditors’ voluntary winding up on 13 December 2018.
  2. The respondents are the current joint and several liquidators of Coastal Oil Singapore Pte Ltd.
  3. The appellants seek a discharge of the orders for the production of documents made against each of them.
  4. Mr Tan, a director of Coastal Oil Singapore Pte Ltd, admitted to preparing fraudulent documents for trades carried out by the Company.
  5. Cosco (HK) issued a public announcement stating that documents in relation to assigned receivables were not genuine.
  6. The respondents learned of tripartite trading loops involving entities such as Sinfeng/Cosco, Coastal Oil, and Yasa/Mewah.
  7. The appellants refused the respondents’ requests for records and documents in relation to its trading relationship.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Sinfeng Marine Services Pte Ltd v Taylor, Joshua James and another and other appeals, , [2020] SGCA 96
  2. Sinfeng Marine Services Pte Ltd v Joshua James Taylor, Civil Appeal No 188 of 2019, Civil Appeal No 188 of 2019
  3. Joshua James Taylor v Sinfeng Marine Services Pte Ltd, Originating Summons No 419 of 2019, Originating Summons No 419 of 2019
  4. Cosco Petroleum Pte Ltd v Joshua James Taylor, Civil Appeal No 189 of 2019, Civil Appeal No 189 of 2019
  5. Joshua James Taylor v Cosco Petroleum Pte Ltd, Originating Summons No 421 of 2019, Originating Summons No 421 of 2019
  6. Costank (S) Pte Ltd v Joshua James Taylor, Civil Appeal No 190 of 2019, Civil Appeal No 190 of 2019
  7. Joshua James Taylor v Costank (S) Pte Ltd, Originating Summons No 420 of 2019, Originating Summons No 420 of 2019
  8. Not Available, CA/SUM 37/2020, CA/SUM 37/2020
  9. Not Available, CA/SUM 38/2020, CA/SUM 38/2020
  10. Not Available, CA/SUM 39/2020, CA/SUM 39/2020
  11. Not Available, Originating Summons No 562 of 2019, Originating Summons No 562 of 2019
  12. Not Available, Originating Summons No 411 of 2019, Originating Summons No 411 of 2019

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Company incorporated in Singapore
Coastal Oil Singapore Pte Ltd placed in creditors’ voluntary winding up
Mr Abuthahir Abdul Gafoor appointed as provisional liquidator
Mr Andrew Grimmett and Mr Lim Loo Khoon appointed joint and several liquidators
Creditors’ meeting where Mr Tan admitted to preparing fraudulent documents
Cosco (HK) issued a public announcement on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange
Creditors’ meeting convened to approve a change in liquidators
Sinfeng provided documentation
Respondents requested appellants’ records and documents
Respondents filed the s 285 applications
High Court judge ordered production of Third Party Documents
Respondents applied for leave to adduce statutory declarations
Respondents granted leave to adduce both statutory declarations
Judgment reserved
Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 came into operation
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Statutory Power of Court in Creditors' Voluntary Winding Up
    • Outcome: The court held that a liquidator in a creditors' voluntary winding up cannot invoke the court’s statutory powers of examination under s 285 without first making an application under s 310(1)(b).
    • Category: Jurisdictional
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Extension of court's power under s 285 to a creditors’ voluntary winding up
      • Requirement of application under s 310(1)(b) of the Companies Act
  2. Reasonableness and Oppressiveness of Production Orders
    • Outcome: The court found that the Third Party Documents sought were not reasonably required and that the scope of the Production Orders may have been oppressive.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Necessity of Third Party Documents
      • Onerous burden on appellants

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Discharge of orders for production of documents

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Winding Up
  • Liquidation
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Shipping
  • Oil and Gas

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Ang Chek Chin v ANS Import & Export Pte Ltd (formerly known as Ang Ngee Seng Import & Export Pte Ltd)High CourtYes[2020] SGHC 177SingaporeCited for legislative history of section 285 of the Companies Act.
Petroships Investment Pte Ltd v Wealthplus Pte Ltd (in members’ voluntary liquidation) (Koh Brothers Building & Civil Engineering Contractor (Pte) Ltd and another, interveners) and another matterHigh CourtYes[2018] 3 SLR 687SingaporeCited regarding the bearing of modes of liquidation on the powers of liquidators.
In re Phoenix Oil and Transport Co Ltd (No. 2)Chancery DivisionYes[1958] Ch 565EnglandCited for the policy distinction between voluntary and compulsory liquidations.
Re James McHale Automobiles LtdNot AvailableYes[1997] 1 BCLC 273EnglandCited for the court's powers of examination under the Companies Act 1948 (c 38) (UK).
Saraceni v Jones (as rec and mgr of Newport Securites Pty Ltd and as agent of the Mortgagee in Possession of 3517 Road, Wilyabrup) and othersSupreme Court of Western AustraliaYes[2012] 287 ALR 551AustraliaCited regarding the court's powers of examination in a voluntary liquidation.
Palmer, in the matter of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liq) v Parbery, in his capacity as Liquidator of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (in Liq)Federal Court of AustraliaYes[2016] FCA 1048AustraliaCited regarding the proper conferment of powers of examination upon a court in a voluntary liquidation.
Handberg (in his capacity as liquidator of S & D International Pty Ltd (in liq) and Another v MIG Property Services Pty Ltd and OthersNot AvailableYes[2010] 79 ACSR 373AustraliaCited regarding the legislative scheme to reduce the work of the court in voluntary winding up proceedings.
In Re Rolls Razor Ltd (No. 2)Not AvailableYes[1970] Ch 576EnglandDiscusses an ex parte application by creditors-appointed liquidators for an order under s 268 of the 1948 UKCA to investigate certain transactions.
Re Norton Warburg Holdings Ltd and Norton Warburg Investment Management LtdNot AvailableYes[1983] BCLC 235EnglandExplains that s 307 was the enabling provision, the gateway to an application for an examination under s 268 in a voluntary winding up.
Interocean Holdings Group (BVI) Ltd v Zi-Techasia (Singapore) Pte Ltd (in liquidation)High CourtYes[2014] 2 SLR 485SingaporeDiscusses the application of s 279 in a voluntary winding up due to s 310.
Liquidator of W&P Piling Pte Ltd v Chew Yin What and othersNot AvailableYes[2004] 3 SLR(R) 164SingaporeCited regarding the power conferred on the court to exercise in the course of the compulsory winding up of a company.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and others v Celestial Nutrifoods Ltd (in compulsory liquidation)Not AvailableYes[2015] 3 SLR 665SingaporeCited regarding the power conferred on the court to exercise in the course of the compulsory winding up of a company.
In re North Australian Territory CompanyCourt of AppealYes(1890) 45 Ch D 87EnglandCited regarding the discretion of the court to summon any officer or any other person.
United Overseas Bank Ltd v Bombay Talkies (S) Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2015] SGHC 142SingaporeCited as an example of a formal defect and procedural irregularity that was remedied under s 392(2) of the CA and r 191(1) of the CWU Rules.
Pan-Asian Services Pte Ltd v European Asian Bank AGNot AvailableYes[1987] SLR(R) 6SingaporeCited as an example of an irregularity that could not be remedied due to the serious consequences of founding a petition on the deeming provision.
Taylor, Joshua James and another v Sinfeng Marine Services Pte Ltd and other mattersHigh CourtYes[2019] SGHC 248SingaporeReference to the respondents’ undertakings given during the hearing of the appellants’ application to stay execution of the Production Orders.
Dean-Willocks v Soluble Solution Hydroponics Pty LtdSupreme Court of New South WalesYes[1997] 42 NSWLR 209AustraliaCited regarding the overriding consideration of whether the proposed course of action is of advantage to the winding up of the company.
Re Lion City Holdings Pte LtdNot AvailableYes[2003] 3 SLR(R) 493SingaporeCited regarding challenging a claim of ignorance as to the Company’s affairs.
Turf Club Auto Emporium Pte Ltd and others v Yeo Boong Hua and others and another appealNot AvailableYes[2018] 2 SLR 655SingaporeCited regarding the elements required to sustain a claim in unlawful means conspiracy.
BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd v Celestial Nutrifoods LtdHigh CourtYes[2014] 4 SLR 331SingaporeCited regarding an order for discovery without examination allows the liquidator to first consider whether his questions are adequately answered, before making a further application to court for an oral examination.
Lin Jian Wei v Lim Eng Hock PeterNot AvailableYes[2011] 3 SLR 1052SingaporeCited regarding the burden to show that manpower and legal costs would be incurred and were demonstrably reasonable, necessary and proportionate.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Companies (Winding Up) Rules (Cap 50, R 1, 2006 Rev Ed) r 191(1)
Companies (Winding Up) Rules (Cap 50, R 1, 2006 Rev Ed) r 1(2)
Companies (Winding Up) Rules (Cap 50, R 1, 2006 Rev Ed) r 2
Companies (Winding Up) Rules (Cap 50, R 1, 2006 Rev Ed) rr 49, 52, 55, 56 and 57

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) s 285Singapore
Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) s 310Singapore
Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) s 305Singapore
Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 ss 526(1)(h) and 526(8)Singapore
Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) s 291(6)Singapore
Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) s 392Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Creditors’ voluntary winding up
  • Production Orders
  • Section 285
  • Section 310
  • Third Party Documents
  • Trading loops
  • Fraudulent documents
  • Liquidators
  • Examination of persons
  • Statutory power

15.2 Keywords

  • Winding up
  • Creditors
  • Liquidators
  • Examination
  • Companies Act
  • Production of documents
  • Statutory power

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Insolvency
  • Winding Up
  • Civil Procedure