Ocean Tankers v Rajah & Tann: Joinder Application in Confidentiality Dispute
Ocean Tankers (Pte) Ltd (OTPL) and Hin Leong Trading (Pte) Ltd (HLT), under judicial management, applied for injunctions against Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP (R&T) to prevent them from advising OTPL and HLT in judicial management applications. The Lim family, shareholders and former directors of OTPL and HLT, sought to join the injunction actions as co-plaintiffs, arguing R&T possessed their confidential information. The High Court dismissed the joinder applications, finding no basis for confidentiality claims and that the Lim family had no standing. The court also noted that the judicial managers were entitled to the companies' information.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Joinder applications dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court dismissed an application to join the Lim family as co-plaintiffs in an injunction action against Rajah & Tann.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ocean Tankers (Pte) Ltd (under judicial management) | Applicant | Corporation | Application Dismissed | Lost | Ong Ziying, Clement, Khoo Shufen Joni |
| Hin Leong Trading (Pte) Ltd (in Liquidation) | Applicant | Corporation | Application Dismissed | Lost | Christopher Anand s/o Daniel, Yeo Yi Ling Eileen |
| Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP | Respondent | Limited Liability Partnership | Won | Won | Toby Landau QC, Liew Wey-Ren Colin |
| Lim Chee Meng | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Lim Huey Ching | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Lim Oon Kuin | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Kannan Ramesh | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Ong Ziying | Damodara Ong LLC |
| Clement | Damodara Ong LLC |
| Khoo Shufen Joni | Damodara Ong LLC |
| Christopher Anand s/o Daniel | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Yeo Yi Ling Eileen | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Toby Landau QC | Essex Court Chambers Duxton |
| Liew Wey-Ren Colin | Colin Liew LLC |
4. Facts
- Ocean Tankers and Hin Leong Trading sought injunctions against Rajah & Tann.
- The injunctions aimed to restrain Rajah & Tann from advising OTPL and HLT in judicial management applications.
- The Lim Family sought to be joined as co-plaintiffs in the injunction actions.
- The Lim Family argued that Rajah & Tann possessed their confidential information.
- Rajah & Tann was engaged by the interim judicial managers of OTPL and HLT.
- The Lim Family claimed a joint retainer with Rajah & Tann.
- The court found no basis for confidentiality claims by the Lim Family.
5. Formal Citations
- Ocean Tankers (Pte) Ltd (under judicial management) v Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP and another matter, Originating Summons No. 666 of 2020 (Summons No. 4429 of 2020) and Originating Summons No. 704 of 2020 (Summons No. 4417 of 2020), [2021] SGHC 144
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Hin Leong Trading engaged Rajah & Tann to advise on insolvency issues. | |
| Mr. O K Lim stepped down as director of Ocean Tankers and Hin Leong Trading. | |
| Ocean Tankers and Hin Leong Trading filed applications for a debtor-in-possession restructuring. | |
| Interim judicial managers were appointed for Hin Leong Trading. | |
| Hin Leong Trading withdrew restructuring application. | |
| Interim judicial managers were appointed for Ocean Tankers. | |
| Ocean Tankers withdrew restructuring application. | |
| Interim judicial managers were appointed as judicial managers of Ocean Tankers and Hin Leong Trading. | |
| Striking-Out applications and Joinder applications were heard. | |
| Applications for leave to appeal against decision on the Joinder applications were heard and declined. | |
| The Lim Family filed Originating Summons 6 and 7 of 2021 in the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. | |
| Full grounds of decision on the Striking-Out applications were provided. | |
| The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal against decision on the Joinder applications. | |
| The Lim Family filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal. | |
| Hearing of the Striking-Out applications and the Joinder applications. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Joinder of Parties
- Outcome: The court held that the Lim Family did not meet the threshold requirement of necessity for joinder.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Necessity of joinder
- Legal interest in the outcome of the action
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 1 SLR 499
- Breach of Confidence
- Outcome: The court held that the information disclosed by the Lim Family was not confidential vis-à-vis OTPL and HLT, and therefore there was no breach of confidence.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Confidentiality of information disclosed under a joint retainer
- Equitable duty of confidence
- Related Cases:
- [1999] 2 AC 222
- [2008] EWHC 2419 (Ch)
8. Remedies Sought
- Injunctive Relief
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Confidence
- Injunction
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Insolvency Law
11. Industries
- Shipping
- Oil Trading
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ocean Tankers (Pte) Ltd (under judicial management) v Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP and another matter | High Court | Yes | [2021] SGHC 47 | Singapore | Cited for the full grounds of the decision on the Striking-Out applications. |
| ARW v Comptroller of Income Tax and another and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 499 | Singapore | Cited for the two-part inquiry approach to joinder under O 15 r 6(2)(b) of the Rules of Court. |
| Prince Jefri Bolkiah v KPMG (a firm) | House of Lords | Yes | [1999] 2 AC 222 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that solicitors may be restrained from acting against a former client to avoid disclosure or misuse of confidential information. |
| Winters v Mishcon de Reya | High Court of Justice | Yes | [2008] EWHC 2419 (Ch) | England and Wales | Cited for the proposition that information disclosed under a joint retainer is not confidential between the parties unless expressly stated. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (R 5, Cap 322, 2014 Rev Ed) |
| O 15 r 6(2)(b)(i) of the Rules of Court |
| O 15 r 6(2)(b)(ii) of the Rules of Court |
| O 92 r 4 of the Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 227G(1) of the Companies Act | Singapore |
| s 227G(2) of the Companies Act | Singapore |
| s 227B(10)(b) of the Companies Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Joinder
- Injunction
- Confidential Information
- Judicial Management
- Joint Retainer
- Striking-Out Application
15.2 Keywords
- Joinder
- Injunction
- Confidentiality
- Judicial Management
- Rajah & Tann
- Ocean Tankers
- Hin Leong Trading
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Insolvency
- Confidentiality
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Injunctions
- Confidentiality
- Judicial Management