VKC v VJZ: Anti-Suit Injunction & Exclusive Jurisdiction in Estate Dispute
In VKC v VJZ and VKA, the Singapore Court of Appeal dismissed VKC's appeal against the High Court's decision to grant an anti-suit injunction. The injunction restrains VKC from pursuing legal proceedings in Indonesia related to the administration of an estate. The court found the Indonesian proceedings to be vexatious and oppressive, as Singapore was the more appropriate forum for resolving the dispute. The judgment was delivered by Belinda Ang Saw Ean JAD on 29 July 2021.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal, upholding an anti-suit injunction against VKC, preventing Indonesian proceedings due to vexatious conduct.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VKC | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Devinder Kumar s/o Ram Sakal Rai, Leong Wen Jia Nicholas |
| VJZ | Respondent | Individual | Anti-suit injunction upheld | Won | Ong Min-Tse Paul, Afzal Ali, Marrissa Miralini Karuna |
| VKA | Respondent | Individual | Anti-suit injunction upheld | Won | Ong Min-Tse Paul, Afzal Ali, Marrissa Miralini Karuna |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Justice of the Appellate Division | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Devinder Kumar s/o Ram Sakal Rai | ACIES Law Corporation |
| Leong Wen Jia Nicholas | ACIES Law Corporation |
| Ong Min-Tse Paul | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
| Afzal Ali | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
| Marrissa Miralini Karuna | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
4. Facts
- The appellant was one of 15 beneficiaries of an estate.
- The respondents were appointed as joint administrators of the estate.
- A settlement agreement was reached among the beneficiaries in 2018.
- The settlement agreement contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause for Singapore courts.
- The appellant commenced proceedings in Indonesia regarding the administration of the estate.
- The respondents sought an anti-suit injunction to restrain the Indonesian proceedings.
- The appellant entered into a new Inheritance Right Settlement Agreement (IRSA) after commencing the Indonesian Proceedings.
5. Formal Citations
- VKC v VJZ and another, Civil Appeal No 102 of 2020, [2021] SGCA 72
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Deceased testator passed away | |
| Last will and testament dated | |
| Respondents appointed as joint and several administrators of the Estate | |
| Mediation commenced | |
| Mediation continued | |
| Settlement agreement executed | |
| Grant of Letters of Administration granted to the respondents | |
| Grant of Letters of Administration issued | |
| Originating Summons Probate No 3 of 2019 filed | |
| Notices published in two newspapers in Indonesia | |
| Indonesian Proceedings commenced | |
| Letter of request for international judicial assistance from the registrar for the Central Jakarta District Court for service of process dated | |
| Inheritance Right Settlement Agreement dated | |
| Summons 10 of 2020 filed | |
| Respondents provided with a letter of request for international judicial assistance | |
| Hearing scheduled in Indonesia | |
| Respondents filed application for an anti-suit injunction | |
| ORC 212/2020 made | |
| Appeal dismissed with costs | |
| Grounds of decision delivered |
7. Legal Issues
- Anti-Suit Injunction
- Outcome: The Court of Appeal upheld the grant of the anti-suit injunction, finding the Indonesian proceedings to be vexatious and oppressive.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Vexatious or Oppressive Proceedings
- Natural Forum
- Juridical Advantage
- Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause
- Outcome: The Court of Appeal disagreed with the High Court's reasoning that the respondents could enforce the exclusive jurisdiction clause as non-parties to the settlement agreement.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Enforcement by Non-Parties
- Interpretation of Contractual Terms
- Natural Forum
- Outcome: The Court of Appeal found that Singapore was the more appropriate forum for resolving the dispute.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Vexatious or Oppressive Conduct
- Outcome: The Court of Appeal found that the appellant's conduct in litigating in Indonesia was vexatious and oppressive.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Bad Faith
- Hopeless Proceedings
8. Remedies Sought
- Anti-Suit Injunction
- Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Tort
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Estate Administration
- Cross-border Disputes
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VJZ & another v VKB & others | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHCF 11 | Singapore | The High Court's decision to grant the anti-suit injunction was appealed. The Court of Appeal disagreed with the High Court's reasoning on the exclusive jurisdiction clause but upheld the injunction on other grounds. |
| Sun Travels & Tours Pvt Ltd v Hilton International Manage (Maldives) Pvt Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 732 | N/A | Cited for the factors to be considered when deciding whether to grant an anti-suit injunction on the ground that the foreign proceedings are otherwise vexatious or oppressive. |
| Koh Kay Yew v Inno-Pacific Holdings Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1997] 2 SLR(R) 148 | N/A | Stressed that Singapore being the natural and proper forum is a necessary condition that must be satisfied before an anti-suit injunction can be granted. |
| Elektrim SA v Vivendi Holdings 1 Corporation | N/A | Yes | [2009] 2 All ER (Comm) 213 | N/A | Cited for the principle that the inherent weakness of a claim sought to be pursued in foreign proceedings, when taken together with other factors, may be a relevant factor in considering whether the foreign proceedings are vexatious. |
| John Reginald Stott Kirkham and others v Trane US Inc and others | N/A | Yes | [2009] 4 SLR(R) 428 | N/A | Cited for the situations that could amount to vexation or oppression in the context of anti-suit injunctions. |
| Fortress Value Recovery Fund I LLC v Blue Skye Special Opportunities Fund LP | N/A | Yes | [2013] 1 WLR 3466 | N/A | Discusses the interpretation of Section 8(1) of the UK Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 in relation to arbitration clauses and third parties. |
| Nisshin Shipping Co Ltd v Cleaves & Co Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2003] EWHC 2602 (Comm) | N/A | Referenced in relation to the legislative history of Section 8 of the UK Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. |
| Hai Jiang 1401 Pte Ltd v Singapore Technologies Marine Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2020] 4 SLR 1014 | N/A | Mentioned as another route whereby a non-party may seek to invoke the exercise of the court’s equitable jurisdiction. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act (Cap 53B, 2002 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (c 31) (UK) | United Kingdom |
| Arbitration Act (Cap 10) | Singapore |
| International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Anti-suit injunction
- Exclusive jurisdiction clause
- Settlement agreement
- Estate administration
- Vexatious proceedings
- Oppressive proceedings
- Natural forum
- Inheritance Right Settlement Agreement
- Beneficiary
- Administrators
- Good faith
- Double actionability rule
- Juridical advantage
15.2 Keywords
- anti-suit injunction
- exclusive jurisdiction
- estate dispute
- Singapore
- Indonesian proceedings
- vexatious
- oppressive
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Trusts
- Estates
- Conflict of Laws
- Injunctions
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Injunctions
- Conflict of Laws
- Trust Law
- Succession Law