Chan Hui Peng v Public Utilities Board: Witness Subpoena & Compensation Dispute
In Chan Hui Peng v Public Utilities Board, the High Court of Singapore addressed a dispute over compensation claimed by Mr. Sim Kwang Jui, who was subpoenaed as a witness but did not testify because the trial was settled early. Mr. Sim sought payment for expenses and time spent at court, arguing he was entitled to compensation as a subpoenaed witness. The court, presided over by Andre Maniam J, dismissed Mr. Sim's claims, holding that he attended court to accompany his wife, the plaintiff, not in compliance with the subpoena, and therefore was not entitled to compensation.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Mr. Sim's claims for payment are dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Dispute over compensation for a subpoenaed witness who did not testify. Court held no payment was due as attendance was to accompany spouse.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chan Hui Peng | Plaintiff | Individual | Settled | Settled | |
| Public Utilities Board | Defendant | Statutory Board | Won | Won | Anparasan s/o Kamachi, Tan Hui Ying Grace |
| Sim Kwang Jui | Other | Individual | Claim Dismissed | Dismissed |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Andre Maniam | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Anparasan s/o Kamachi | WhiteFern LLC |
| Tan Hui Ying Grace | WhiteFern LLC |
4. Facts
- Ms. Chan sued PUB, and the trial was scheduled for two weeks.
- Mr. Sim, Ms. Chan's husband, was subpoenaed by PUB as a witness.
- The trial was settled after four days when Ms. Chan accepted PUB's offer to settle.
- Mr. Sim sought payment from PUB for attending court, including transport, meals, and salary.
- Mr. Sim had applied for leave to accompany his wife to court before being subpoenaed.
- Mr. Sim was excused from the courtroom as he was a potential witness.
- Mr. Sim's attendance as a witness was scheduled for a later date, but the trial ended before he was required to testify.
5. Formal Citations
- Chan Hui Peng v Public Utilities Board, Suit No 1022 of 2018, [2022] SGHC 232
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Trial scheduled for two weeks | |
| Mr. Sim applied for leave for the period of 23 to 27 November 2020 | |
| Subpoena served on Mr. Sim | |
| Trial commenced | |
| Last full day of trial | |
| Court informed that the matter had been settled | |
| Rules of Court 2021 came into force | |
| Law Society dismissed Mr. Sim's complaint | |
| Mr Sim filed a claim in the Small Claims Tribunals against WhiteFern | |
| PUB asked the trial judge to resolve the issue of what Mr Sim should be paid | |
| Mr Sim made submissions on this issue | |
| Judgment date | |
| Decision conveyed to both PUB and Mr Sim by way of a letter from the court |
7. Legal Issues
- Entitlement to Compensation for Subpoenaed Witness
- Outcome: The court held that Mr. Sim was not entitled to any payment for his expenses or time, as he was not attending court on the subpoena but to accompany his wife.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 2 SLR 524
8. Remedies Sought
- Payment for expenses
- Payment for time spent at court
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lam Hwa Engineering & Trading Pte Ltd v Yang Qiang | High Court | Yes | [2013] 2 SLR 524 | Singapore | Cited to support the interpretation of Order 38 rule 22, stating that the litigant who subpoenas the witness is obliged to compensate the witness's travel expenses. |
| Ong Wui Teck (personal representative of the estate of Chew Chen Chin, deceased) v Ong Wui Swoon and another and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] SGCA 61 | Singapore | Cited to emphasize that Order 59 rule 18A does not entitle a litigant-in-person to costs as of right, and that the court generally awards costs to the successful party. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed), Order 38 rule 22 | Singapore |
| Rules of Court 2021, Order 15 rule 4(9) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court 2021, Order 1 rule 2(3)(a) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court 2021, Order 1 rule 2(2) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court 2021, Order 21 rule 7 | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed), Order 59 rule 18A | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Subpoena
- Witness compensation
- Rules of Court
- Attendance
- Expenses
- Settlement
- Accompanying litigant
15.2 Keywords
- Subpoena
- Witness
- Compensation
- Expenses
- Rules of Court
- Singapore
- Civil Procedure
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Witnesses
- Legal Costs
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Witnesses
- Subpoenas