U Myo Nyunt v First Property Holdings: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Breach of Trust & Fiduciary Duty
U Myo Nyunt @ Michael Nyunt appealed against the High Court's decision to dismiss his application to set aside a default judgment and an assessment of damages obtained by First Property Holdings Pte Ltd. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that U Myo Nyunt's delay in applying to set aside the judgments was deliberate and part of a litigation strategy, and that his defenses did not outweigh the factors against granting the relief sought. The case involved claims of breach of trust and fiduciary duties related to property projects in Myanmar.
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
Appeal to set aside default judgment for breach of trust and fiduciary duties was dismissed due to appellant's delay and litigation strategy.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| U Myo Nyunt @ Michael Nyunt | Appellant, Defendant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Abraham S Vergis, Zhuo Jiaxiang, Lau Hui Ming Kenny |
| First Property Holdings Pte Ltd | Respondent, Plaintiff | Corporation | Appeal Upheld | Won | Chan Tai-hui Jason, Oh Jialing Evangeline, Tan Xue Yang, Gan Yun Han Rebecca |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Judith Prakash | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge of the Appellate Division | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Abraham S Vergis | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Zhuo Jiaxiang | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Lau Hui Ming Kenny | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Chan Tai-hui Jason | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
| Oh Jialing Evangeline | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
| Tan Xue Yang | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
| Gan Yun Han Rebecca | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
4. Facts
- First Property Holdings sued U Myo Nyunt in Singapore for breach of trust and fiduciary duties.
- Default judgment was entered against U Myo Nyunt for failing to enter an appearance.
- Damages were assessed in U Myo Nyunt's absence, resulting in a judgment for US$66,243,572.84.
- U Myo Nyunt applied to set aside the default judgment and assessment of damages more than three years later.
- U Myo Nyunt's decision not to participate in the Singapore proceedings was based on advice that the judgment would not be enforceable in Myanmar.
- U Myo Nyunt challenged the registration of the Singapore judgments in Australia before applying to set them aside in Singapore.
- The High Court set aside the judgment for the loan amount but not the judgment for damages.
5. Formal Citations
- U Myo Nyunt @ Michael Nyunt v First Property Holdings Pte Ltd, Civil Appeal No 176 of 2020, [2021] SGCA 73
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Joint venture agreement entered into | |
| Company incorporated in Myanmar | |
| Natmauk Property purchased by the Company | |
| Loan agreement entered into | |
| Company transferred Natmauk Property to U Myo Nyunt and his wife | |
| Criminal Case 102 commenced | |
| Civil Case 330 commenced | |
| Civil Case 2275 commenced | |
| Company placed in liquidation | |
| U Myo Nyunt acquitted in Criminal Case 102 | |
| Appeal against acquittal dismissed in Criminal Case 102 | |
| First Property Holdings sued U Myo Nyunt in Singapore | |
| Service Order made | |
| Notice of Singapore proceedings served on U Myo Nyunt in Australia | |
| January default judgment entered against U Myo Nyunt | |
| Assessment Judgment obtained | |
| January default judgment and Assessment Judgment registered in Australia | |
| U Myo Nyunt filed setting aside application | |
| High Court dismissed U Myo Nyunt’s application to set aside the O13 Interlocutory Judgment and the Assessment Judgment | |
| Appeal heard | |
| Appeal dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Setting Aside Default Judgment
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant's delay in applying to set aside the default judgment was deliberate and inexcusable, and that his defenses did not outweigh the factors against granting the relief sought.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Delay in application
- Triable issues
- Reason for absence at trial
- Service Out of Jurisdiction
- Outcome: The court held that the requirements for granting leave for service out of jurisdiction were satisfied.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Sub-Issues:
- Good arguable case
- Forum conveniens
- Full and frank disclosure
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages
- Account of Profits
- Repayment of Loan
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Trust
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
- Inducement of Breach of Debenture
- Breach of Loan Agreement
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Appeals
11. Industries
- Real Estate
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Property Holdings Pte Ltd v U Myo Nyunt @ Michael Nyunt | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHC 276 | Singapore | The High Court decision being appealed against, providing the background and reasons for the initial judgment. |
| Strachan v The Gleaner Co Ltd and another | Privy Council | Yes | [2005] 1 WLR 3204 | England | Cited for the principle that a defendant cannot dispute liability at the assessment hearing while a default judgment stands. |
| Zoom Communications Ltd v Broadcast Solutions Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 500 | Singapore | Cited for the established requirements to be satisfied in order to obtain leave to serve out of jurisdiction. |
| Mercurine Pte Ltd v Canberra Development Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 907 | Singapore | Cited for the legal principles on the effects of a delay in making a setting aside application. |
| Ang Kim Soon v Sunray Marine Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR(R) 714 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where a deliberate choice on the part of a defendant to stay away from the proceedings would be a very strong factor which weighs against the court’s discretion to set aside a regular O 13 judgment. |
| Zhao Feng Guo v Tan Hong Soon (trading as Intense Engineering Construction) | High Court | Yes | [2003] 2 SLR(R) 417 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where a deliberate or extended delay on the part of the defendant in applying to set aside a judgment is a factor that weighs against setting aside. |
| Su Sh-Hsyu v Wee Yue Chew | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 3 SLR(R) 673 | Singapore | Cited as the main authority on O 35 r 2 and the factors to be considered when setting aside a judgment obtained in the absence of a party at trial. |
| Vallipuram Gireesa Venkit Eswaran v Scanply International Wood Product (S) Ltd (Kim Yew Trading Co, third party) | High Court | Yes | [1995] 2 SLR(R) 507 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where judgment was entered and damages assessed against a third party who had failed to attend trial. |
| Regione Piemonte v Dexia Crediop Spa | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] EWCA Civ 1298 | England | Cited for the principle that the question as to whether the application has been made promptly is now a mandatory, and therefore an important, consideration. |
| Standard Bank plc and another v Agrinvest International Inc and others | English High Court | Yes | [2009] EWHC 1692 (Comm) | England | Cited for the principle that promptness now carries much greater weight than before. |
| Abhilash s/o Kunchian Krishnan v Yeo Hock Huat and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 873 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a new argument on appeal would not be entertained if further findings of fact are required. |
| Tan Kim Seng v Ibrahim Victor Adam | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2003] 1 SLR(R) 181 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a plaintiff who obtained an interlocutory judgment was required to proceed towards the assessment stage within a year to avoid loss of his rights to any damages. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court | Singapore |
| Limitation Act (Cap 163, 1996 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| 1991 Foreign Judgments Act (Cth) | Australia |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Default Judgment
- Assessment of Damages
- Setting Aside
- Service Out of Jurisdiction
- Forum Conveniens
- Triable Issues
- Delay
- Litigation Strategy
- Breach of Trust
- Fiduciary Duty
15.2 Keywords
- default judgment
- setting aside
- civil procedure
- breach of trust
- fiduciary duty
- Singapore
- appeal
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Trust Law
- Fiduciary Law
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Setting Aside
- Judgments and Orders