Resolution & Collection Corp v Kawabe: Bifurcation of Trial Application

The Resolution and Collection Corporation, formerly known as Housing Loan Administration Corporation, sued Tsuneji Kawabe, Kawabe Bussan Co Ltd, Yoshiko Kawabe, Michiyo Kawabe, Natamon Protpakorn, Dwell Pte Ltd, and Cloud Bliss Limited in the General Division of the High Court of Singapore, seeking to recover money under Japanese judgments based on unjust enrichment and knowing receipt. The 4th, 6th, and 7th Defendants applied for a bifurcation of trial to determine if the plaintiff was time-barred from enforcing the Japanese Judgments and whether the plaintiff has locus standi to seek a declaration that the 4th, 6th and 7th Defendant’s assets are held on trust for the benefit of the 1st and 2nd Defendants. Choo Han Teck J dismissed the application, finding that a bifurcation of trial would not be just and convenient.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application of the Specific Defendants dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore court denies application for bifurcation of trial concerning enforcement of Japanese judgments, unjust enrichment, and knowing receipt.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Tsuneji KawabeDefendantIndividualNo Specific OutcomeNeutral
Kawabe Bussan Co LtdDefendantCorporationNo Specific OutcomeNeutral
Yoshiko KawabeDefendantIndividualNo Specific OutcomeNeutral
Michiyo KawabeDefendantIndividualApplication for Bifurcation DismissedWon
Natamon ProtpakornDefendantIndividualNo Specific OutcomeNeutral
Cloud Bliss LimitedDefendantCorporationApplication for Bifurcation DismissedWon
The Resolution and Collection CorporationPlaintiffCorporationApplication for Bifurcation DismissedLost
Dwell Pte LtdDefendantCorporationApplication for Bifurcation DismissedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Ng Yuen SiangEugene Thuraisingam LLP
Shem Khoo Ching ShinFocus Law Asia LLC
Veronica Teo Jia HuiFocus Law Asia LLC
Daniel Lim Ying SinJoyce A. Tan & Partners LLC

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiff, a Japanese company, sought to recover money under Japanese judgments against the defendants.
  2. The 1st Defendant, Mr. Kawabe, was found liable for fraudulently taking monies out of Kawabe Bussan Co Ltd.
  3. The plaintiff claims Ms. Michiyo Kawabe holds assets from Mr. Kawabe through Dwell Pte Ltd and Cloud Bliss Limited.
  4. The Specific Defendants applied for a bifurcation of trial to determine if the plaintiff was time-barred from enforcing the Japanese Judgments.
  5. The Specific Defendants also sought to determine if the plaintiff has locus standi to seek a declaration that the 4th, 6th and 7th Defendant’s assets are held on trust for the benefit of the 1st and 2nd Defendants.
  6. The court found that the preliminary issues were not clearly demarcated from the other issues in the main trial.
  7. The court determined that a bifurcation of trial would not be just and convenient in this action.

5. Formal Citations

  1. The Resolution and Collection Corp v Tsuneji Kawabe and others, Suit No 716 of 2021(Summons No 334 of 2023), [2023] SGHC 100

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Judgment No 1 obtained from the 8th Civil Division of the Osaka District Court
Judgment No 2 obtained from the 11th Civil Division of the Osaka District Court
Interest accruing from this date
Judgment No 3 obtained from the 22nd Civil Division of the Osaka District Court
HC/SUM 344/2022 filed for bifurcation of trial
Judgment reserved
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Bifurcation of Trial
    • Outcome: The court dismissed the application for bifurcation of trial, finding it not just and convenient in this action.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2022] SGHC 253
  2. Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
    • Outcome: The court did not rule on the enforceability of the Japanese Judgments, as the issue was raised in the context of a bifurcation application.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Unjust Enrichment
    • Outcome: The court did not rule on the merits of the unjust enrichment claim, as the issue was raised in the context of a bifurcation application.
    • Category: Substantive
  4. Knowing Receipt
    • Outcome: The court did not rule on the merits of the knowing receipt claim, as the issue was raised in the context of a bifurcation application.
    • Category: Substantive
  5. Locus Standi
    • Outcome: The court did not rule on the issue of locus standi, as the issue was raised in the context of a bifurcation application.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Declaration of Trust

9. Cause of Actions

  • Unjust Enrichment
  • Knowing Receipt

10. Practice Areas

  • Civil Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Dai Yi Ting v Chuang Fu Yuan (Grabcycle (SG) Pte Ltd and another, third parties)High CourtYes[2022] SGHC 253SingaporeCited for the principle that the primary consideration for bifurcation of trial is whether it would be expeditious and cost-saving.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Order 33 Rules 2 & 3 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, 2014 Rev Ed) (“ROC 2014”)

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Bifurcation of Trial
  • Japanese Judgments
  • Unjust Enrichment
  • Knowing Receipt
  • Locus Standi
  • Preliminary Issues
  • Enforcement of Foreign Judgments

15.2 Keywords

  • Bifurcation
  • Trial
  • Civil Procedure
  • Singapore
  • Japanese Judgments
  • Unjust Enrichment
  • Knowing Receipt

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments80
Civil Procedure75
Knowing Receipt70
Unjust Enrichment70
Civil Practice60
Asset Recovery50
Estoppel30
Arbitration20
Res Judicata20

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Trial
  • Bifurcation