PT Karya Indo Batam v Wang Zhenwen: Anti-Suit Injunction for Batam Project Dispute
In PT Karya Indo Batam v Wang Zhenwen, the High Court of Singapore granted an anti-suit injunction to Oxley Batam Pte Ltd, restraining PT Karya Indo Batam from continuing actions in Indonesia against OBPL and other entities related to a joint venture for the Oxley Convention City project in Batam. The court found PT KIB's actions vexatious and oppressive, constituting duplicitous proceedings. The court ordered PT KIB to withdraw the claims filed in the Batam District Court and the Central Jakarta District Court, and restrained PT KIB from commencing further proceedings related to the Batam Project.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Anti-suit injunction granted to restrain PT Karya Indo Batam from pursuing actions in Indonesia relating to the Batam Project.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore court grants anti-suit injunction to restrain PT Karya Indo Batam from pursuing actions in Indonesia related to the Oxley Convention City project.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PT Karya Indo Batam | Plaintiff, Respondent | Corporation | Anti-suit injunction granted | Lost | |
| Wang Zhenwen | Defendant | Individual | Anti-suit injunction granted | Neutral | |
| Rich Capital Holdings Limited (formerly known as Infinio Group Limited) | Defendant | Corporation | Anti-suit injunction granted | Neutral | |
| Rich-Capital Construction Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Anti-suit injunction granted | Neutral | |
| Oxley Batam Pte Ltd(formerly known as Totality Pte Ltd) | Defendant, Applicant | Corporation | Anti-suit injunction granted | Won | |
| Tai Kok Kit Aldrin | Defendant | Individual | Anti-suit injunction granted | Neutral |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lee Seiu Kin | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- PT KIB and OBPL entered a joint venture to develop the Oxley Convention City project in Batam, Indonesia.
- The joint venture was carried out through PT OKIB, in which PT KIB and OBPL were equal shareholders.
- PT KIB commenced Suit 104 in Singapore against Wang, RCH, RLC, OBPL, and Aldrin, alleging conspiracy to injure PT KIB.
- PT KIB commenced actions against PT OKIB, OBPL, and others in the Batam District Court and the Central Jakarta District Court.
- OBPL applied for an anti-suit injunction to restrain PT KIB from pursuing the Indonesian Actions.
- The Singapore court found that the Indonesian Actions were vexatious and oppressive, constituting duplicitous proceedings.
5. Formal Citations
- PT Karya Indo Batam v Wang Zhenwen and others, Suit No 104 of 2020(Summons No 4991 of 2020), [2021] SGHC 177
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Shareholders’ agreement between PT KIB and OBPL was signed. | |
| Joint Operation Agreement between PT KIB and OBPL was signed. | |
| Rich Capital Holdings Limited acquired an 80% stake in OBPL. | |
| Tai Kok Kit Aldrin was employed to oversee the Batam project. | |
| Construction contract for the Batam Project was awarded to Rich-Link Construction Pte Ltd. | |
| PT KIB commenced Suit 104 against Wang, RCH, RLC, OBPL, and Aldrin. | |
| PT KIB commenced an action against PT OKIB in the Batam District Court. | |
| Parties reached a settlement in the Batam District Court action. | |
| PT KIB commenced an action against OBPL and PT OKIB in the Batam District Court. | |
| PT KIB commenced an action against OBPL, Wang, RCH, RLC, OIH, and RBPL in the Central Jakarta District Court. | |
| OBPL filed application for an anti-suit injunction. | |
| Applicant filed a request with the Batam City Land Office to temporarily block the land forming the subject of the Batam Project. | |
| 4th Defendant-Applicant’s Written Submissions dated | |
| Hearing date. | |
| Judgment date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Whether the Indonesian Actions are vexatious or oppressive
- Outcome: The court found that the Indonesian Actions were vexatious and oppressive to the applicant.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Duplicitous proceedings
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 2 SLR 372
- [2009] 4 SLR(R) 428
- [2015] 5 SLR 873
- [2013] 4 SLR 1097
- [1987] AC 871
- [2015] AC 616
- [1997] 2 SLR(R) 148
- [1999] 2 SLR(R) 955
- [2010] 1 SLR 524
- Whether granting the anti-suit injunction would breach comity
- Outcome: The court found that there was no breach of comity in granting the anti-suit injunction.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 2 SLR 372
- [1997] 2 SLR(R) 148
- Whether OBPL made the application in bad faith
- Outcome: The court held that OBPL did not make the present application in bad faith.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Anti-suit injunction
- Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Conspiracy to injure
- Breach of contract
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Anti-suit Injunctions
11. Industries
- Construction
- Real Estate Development
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar v Jhaveri Darsan Jitendra | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 372 | Singapore | Cited for the legal principles governing anti-suit injunctions and the relevant factors for the court's determination. |
| John Reginald Stott Kirkham v Trane US Inc | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2009] 4 SLR(R) 428 | Singapore | Cited for the five specific factors relevant to the court’s determination of whether to grant an anti-suit injunction. |
| PT Sandipala Arthaputra v STMicroelectronics Asia Pacific Ltd and others | High Court | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 873 | Singapore | Cited regarding the issue of locus standi in anti-suit injunction applications and the protection of the integrity of Singapore proceedings. |
| American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd | House of Lords | Yes | [1975] AC 396 | England and Wales | Mentioned as irrelevant to the present matter as the principles and factors set out in Lakshmi are well-settled law. |
| Turner v Grovit | House of Lords | Yes | [2002] 1 WLR 107 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the applicant for an anti-suit injunction must have a legitimate interest in making the application. |
| Virsagi Management (S) Pte Ltd v Welltech Construction Pte Ltd and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 1097 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of lis alibi pendens and its relevance to the inquiry of whether foreign proceedings are vexatious or oppressive. |
| Stichting Shell Pensioenfonds v Krys | Unknown | Yes | [2015] AC 616 | Unknown | Cited for the principle that it is unfair or unconscionable for a defendant to have to fight the same battle twice. |
| Société Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v Lee Kui Jak | Unknown | Yes | [1987] AC 871 | Unknown | Cited for the principle that there is no presumption that a multiplicity of proceedings is vexatious. |
| Koh Kay Yew v Inno-Pacific Holdings Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 2 SLR(R) 148 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that courts should prevent the inherent abuse of different judicial systems by compelling a party to choose the jurisdiction to litigate in when actions are commenced concurrently in two jurisdictions. |
| Yusen Air & Sea Service (S) Pte Ltd v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR(R) 955 | Singapore | Cited for the endorsement of the principle of election by the Court of Appeal in Koh Kay Yew. |
| Beckkett Pte Ltd v Deutsche Bank AG and another | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 524 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that where duplicate proceedings are conducted concurrently in different jurisdictions by the same plaintiff, that plaintiff bears the burden of justifying the continuance of the concurrent proceedings. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Anti-suit injunction
- Vexatious
- Oppressive
- Duplicitous proceedings
- Lis alibi pendens
- Comity
- Batam Project
- Oxley Convention City
- Joint venture
- Shareholders’ agreement
15.2 Keywords
- Anti-suit injunction
- Singapore
- Indonesian Actions
- Batam Project
- PT Karya Indo Batam
- Oxley Batam Pte Ltd
- Vexatious
- Oppressive
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Anti-suit injunctions | 95 |
| Vexatious and oppressive conduct | 90 |
| Conflict of Laws | 80 |
| Restraint of foreign proceedings | 80 |
| Injunctions | 75 |
| Comity | 60 |
| Civil Procedure | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Injunctions
- Conflict of Laws