Kashmire Merkaney v NCL Housing: Appeal Against Personal Guarantee Enforcement & Economic Duress
Kashmire Merkaney appealed against the High Court's decision in favor of NCL Housing Pte Ltd, which enforced personal guarantees for loans to Sea-Shore Transportation Pte Ltd. Merkaney also applied to adduce further evidence. The Appellate Division, comprising Belinda Ang Saw Ean JAD, Woo Bih Li JAD, and Quentin Loh JAD, dismissed both the appeal and the application, finding no merit in Merkaney's defenses of an oral agreement and unconscionability, and rejecting the unpleaded defense of economic duress. The court found that the judge's findings were supported by the evidence.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Ex Tempore Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal against judgment enforcing personal guarantees. The court dismissed the appeal, finding no oral agreement or economic duress to invalidate the guarantees.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kashmire Merkaney | Appellant, Defendant | Individual | Appeal dismissed | Lost | |
| NCL Housing Pte Ltd | Respondent, Plaintiff | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Sea-Shore Transportation Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment against Defendant | Lost | |
| Sushela w/o Vijayarahavan | Defendant | Individual | Judgment against Defendant | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge of the Appellate Division | Yes |
| Woo Bih Li | Judge of the Appellate Division | No |
| Quentin Loh | Judge of the Appellate Division | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Mulani Prakash P | M&A Law Corporation |
| Safiuddin Naseem | M&A Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- Kashmire Merkaney gave 20 personal guarantees for loans made by NCL Housing to Sea-Shore Transportation.
- The loans were interest-free for one year.
- Sea-Shore Transportation defaulted on the loans, totaling $4,090,830.26.
- Merkaney claimed an oral agreement existed not to enforce the guarantees.
- Merkaney raised the defense of economic duress on appeal, which was not pleaded below.
- Merkaney alleged her previous counsel was incompetent.
- Merkaney claimed NCL Housing managed Sea-Shore Transportation poorly.
5. Formal Citations
- Kashmire Merkaney v NCL Housing Pte Ltd and another matter, Civil Appeal No 30 of 2021, [2022] SGHC(A) 23
- NCL Housing Pte Ltd v Sea-Shore Transportation Pte Ltd and others, , [2021] SGHC 29
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| First personal guarantee given | |
| Last personal guarantee given | |
| Judicial management process commenced | |
| Suit No 297 of 2019 filed by NCL Housing Pte Ltd | |
| Appellant swore affidavit of evidence-in-chief | |
| Judgment granted in favor of NCL Housing Pte Ltd | |
| Civil Appeal No 30 of 2021 filed | |
| Judgment delivered |
7. Legal Issues
- Enforceability of Personal Guarantees
- Outcome: The court held that the personal guarantees were enforceable.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Existence of oral agreement not to enforce guarantees
- Economic duress
- Unconscionability
- Admissibility of Further Evidence on Appeal
- Outcome: The court denied the application to adduce further evidence.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Reasonable diligence in obtaining evidence
- Materiality of evidence
- Credibility of evidence
8. Remedies Sought
- Rescission of Personal Guarantees
- Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Enforcement of Guarantee
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Appeals
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BNX v BOE | High Court | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 215 | Singapore | Cited for the cumulative requirements in Ladd v Marshall for adducing further evidence. |
| Anan Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd v VTB Bank (Public Joint Stock Co) | High Court | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 341 | Singapore | Cited for the circumstances where the Ladd v Marshall requirements may be relaxed. |
| Yee Heng Khay (alias Roger) v Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd and another matter | High Court (Appellate Division) | Yes | [2022] SGHC(A) 20 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that it is at odds with the exercise of appellate jurisdiction to reverse the judgment below on the basis of untested evidence. |
| BOM v BOK and another appeal | High Court | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 349 | Singapore | Cited for the legal requirements for unconscionability. |
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
- Personal Guarantee
- Oral Agreement
- Economic Duress
- Unconscionability
- Ladd v Marshall
- Entire Agreement Clause
15.2 Keywords
- Personal Guarantee
- Appeal
- Economic Duress
- Oral Agreement
- Unconscionability
- Singapore
- Civil Litigation
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Guarantee | 85 |
| Contract Law | 70 |
| Civil Procedure | 60 |
| Unconscionability | 50 |
| Misrepresentation | 40 |
| Entire Agreement Clause | 40 |
| Economic Duress | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
- Guarantees