Lazarus Century Construction v SLH Development: Debt Recovery Dispute

In Suit No 588 of 2020, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore heard a case between Lazarus Century Construction Pte Ltd (Plaintiff) and SLH Development Pte Ltd (Defendant). The plaintiff claimed the defendant failed to repay a loan of $1.398 million. The defendant argued that the sum was a repayment of previous loans extended to the plaintiff. Justice Kwek Mean Luck dismissed the plaintiff's claim, finding that the evidence indicated the payments were repayments from the plaintiff to the defendant for advances made by the defendant. The court ordered the garnished sum of $86,355.33 and the sum of $300 for bank charges to be returned to the defendant.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiff's claim dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Lazarus Century Construction sues SLH Development for loan repayment. The court dismissed the claim, finding the payments were loan repayments to SLH.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Lazarus Century Construction Pte LtdPlaintiffCorporationClaim DismissedLost
SLH Development Pte LtdDefendantCorporationClaim DismissedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kwek Mean LuckJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Ashok Kumar RaiCairnhill Law LLC
Yeo Wei Ying JolynCairnhill Law LLC
Yong Shu Wei ChristopherLegal Solutions LLC
Fong Lin ElizabethLegal Solutions LLC

4. Facts

  1. Lazarus Century Construction claimed it made a loan of $1.398m to SLH Development.
  2. SLH Development denied the $1.398m was a loan, asserting it was repayment of previous loans to Lazarus Century Construction.
  3. Lazarus Century Construction commenced work as the main contractor for a project owned by SLH Development.
  4. James Koh, former director and CEO of Lazarus Century Construction, allegedly agreed to the loan with Chan Kok Chuan, director of SLH Development.
  5. Lazarus Century Construction lacked documentary evidence of the loan agreement.
  6. Payment vouchers describing a loan from Lazarus Century Construction to SLH Development were not counter-signed by SLH Development.
  7. Written correspondence from Lazarus Century Construction characterized the payments as repayments to SLH Development for advance payments.
  8. James Koh requested a loan of $50,000 from Chan to pay Lazarus Century Construction's suppliers, rather than requesting repayment of the alleged loan.
  9. Lazarus Century Construction initially claimed an unpaid balance from the contract sum, then a security deposit, before claiming the loan.

5. Formal Citations

    6. Timeline

    DateEvent
    Letter of Award for the Project dated
    Defendant received aggregate sum of $1.398m through ten cheques from the plaintiff
    Defendant received aggregate sum of $1.398m through ten cheques from the plaintiff
    James Koh sent email and letter to Chan requesting a loan
    Statement of final accounts signed by Chan
    Plaintiff issued letter of demand to the defendant
    Plaintiff filed first Statement of Claim
    James Koh passed away
    Li's affidavit filed in support of HC/SUM 727/2021
    Plaintiff filed amended Statement of Claim
    Trial commenced
    Trial continued
    Trial continued
    Plaintiff's Reply Submission dated
    Judgment reserved

    7. Legal Issues

    1. Existence of Debt
      • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of the loan. The evidence showed that the payments were repayments from the plaintiff to the defendant for monies advanced to the plaintiff from the defendant.
      • Category: Substantive

    8. Remedies Sought

    1. Monetary Damages

    9. Cause of Actions

    • Breach of Contract
    • Debt Recovery

    10. Practice Areas

    • Commercial Litigation
    • Construction Disputes

    11. Industries

    • Construction

    12. Cited Cases

    Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
    Public Prosecutor v Singh KalpanathHigh CourtYes[1995] 3 SLR(R) 158SingaporeCited for the principle that the court should sieve the evidence and ascertain which parts of it may be accepted, even if a witness has lied on one or two points.

    13. Applicable Rules

    Rule Name
    No applicable rules

    14. Applicable Statutes

    Statute NameJurisdiction
    No applicable statutes

    15. Key Terms and Keywords

    15.1 Key Terms

    • Loan
    • Repayment
    • Letter of Award
    • Statement of Account
    • Payment Voucher
    • Security Deposit
    • Final Account

    15.2 Keywords

    • Loan
    • Debt
    • Construction
    • Singapore
    • High Court
    • Judgment

    17. Areas of Law

    Area NameRelevance Score
    Existence of debt90
    Debt Recovery85
    Contract Law75
    Evidence Law60
    Estoppel30
    Summary Judgement20
    Misrepresentation15
    Company Law10

    16. Subjects

    • Contract Law
    • Construction Law
    • Debt Recovery