Tan Meow Hiang v Ong Kay Yong: Costs Order and Instalment Payments Dispute
In a dispute between Tan Meow Hiang (trading as Chip Huat) and Ong Kay Yong (trading as Wee Wee Laundry Service) over the ownership of Wee Wee Laundry Service, the High Court heard an appeal from the District Court. The plaintiff, Tan Meow Hiang, appealed against the District Judge's decision to award Ong Kay Yong $72,200 and the order that each party bear their own costs. Goh Yihan J allowed the appeal, overturning the District Judge's decision. The court awarded costs of $35,000 to Tan Meow Hiang and rejected Ong Kay Yong's request for instalment orders regarding the costs and the judgment sum.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed; Instalment Order Denied
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court addresses costs and instalment orders in a dispute over Wee Wee Laundry Service ownership, allowing the appeal and denying instalment payments.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan Meow Hiang t/a Chip Huat | Appellant, Plaintiff | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | Jheong Siew Yin |
| Ong Kay Yong t/a Wee Wee Laundry Service | Respondent, Defendant | Individual | Instalment Order Denied | Lost | Lim Huat Sing Julian Sebastian, Tay Sheng Xiang Kesmond |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Goh Yihan | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Jheong Siew Yin | Constellation Law Chambers LLC |
| Lim Huat Sing Julian Sebastian | JLim Law Corporation |
| Tay Sheng Xiang Kesmond | JLim Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- The underlying suit involved a dispute between relatives over the ownership of Wee Wee Laundry Service.
- The plaintiff claimed for $140,000 or the transfer of ownership of WWLS.
- The defendant counterclaimed for $127,500 and $72,200.
- The District Judge granted the plaintiff’s claim for the ownership of WWLS and the defendant’s counterclaim for $72,200.
- The plaintiff appealed against the award of $72,200 to the defendant and the order that each party bear their own costs.
- The defendant requested instalment orders in respect of the costs of the appeal and the judgment sum of $95,879.98.
- The defendant had to sell his personal residence in 2019 to repay his creditors and remains in debt to date.
5. Formal Citations
- Tan Meow Hiang (trading as Chip Huat) v Ong Kay Yong (trading as Wee Wee Laundry Service), , [2023] SGHC 286
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| District Court Suit No 3616 of 2016 filed | |
| District Court Appeal No 1 of 2023 filed | |
| Parties heard on appeal | |
| Judgment given in favour of the plaintiff | |
| Parties filed written submissions on costs order | |
| Defendant requested instalment orders | |
| Plaintiff filed reply to request for instalment orders | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Appropriate Costs Order
- Outcome: The court awarded the plaintiff costs of $35,000 all-in for the proceedings below and the appeal.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2023] SGHC 209
- [2022] 5 SLR 525
- Instalment Orders
- Outcome: The court rejected the defendant’s request to make the instalment order sought in relation to costs of the appeal and the judgment sum arising from the underlying suit.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2017] SGMC 24
- [2003] SGMC 41
- [2016] 3 SLR 1
- [1893] 1 SSLR 64
- [1931-1932] FMSLR 231
- (1880) ILR 2 All 129 (Allahabad High Court)
- [2023] SGHC 64
- [1934] 1 MLJ 299
- [1959] 1 MLJ 32
- [2018] EWCA Civ 803
- [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1053
8. Remedies Sought
- Transfer of Ownership
- Monetary Damages
- Costs
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Ownership Dispute
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Laundry Service
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan Meow Hiang (trading as Chip Huat) v Ong Kay Yong (trading as Wee Wee Laundry Service) | High Court | Yes | [2023] SGHC 218 | Singapore | Refers to the substantive appeal decision. |
| Tan Meow Hiang t/a Chip Huat v Ong Kay Yong | District Court | Yes | [2023] SGDC 29 | Singapore | Refers to the District Judge’s judgment in the underlying suit. |
| Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd v Jurong Primewide Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2023] SGHC 209 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that costs will generally follow the event. |
| Comfort Management Pte Ltd v OGSP Engineering Pte Ltd and another | High Court | Yes | [2022] 5 SLR 525 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that costs will generally follow the event. |
| Aver Asia (S) Pte Ltd v RJS Engineering and Marine Services Pte Ltd | Magistrate Court | Yes | [2017] SGMC 24 | Singapore | Cited for the relevant factors in deciding whether to make instalment orders. |
| Khoo Wai Keong Ronnie v Hanam Andrew J | Magistrate Court | Yes | [2003] SGMC 41 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an instalment order is meant to be concessionary towards judgment debtors who are mired in circumstances of serious hardship. |
| Mok Kah Hong v Zheng Zhuan Yao | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 3 SLR 1 | Singapore | Cited for a separate issue of when committal proceedings will not be an appropriate enforcement mechanism when a judgment debtor had genuine difficulties complying with an instalment order. |
| M P L A Peyna Carpen Chitty v Max J D’Souza (R Wildman, garnishee) | N/A | Yes | [1893] 1 SSLR 64 | N/A | Cited for the policy of the law in not permitting a man to be stripped of all means of livelihood and entirely pauperized. |
| Muthupalaniappa Chettiar v Mohamed Yusof bin Haji Ahmad Ee Tin | N/A | Yes | [1931-1932] FMSLR 231 | N/A | Cited for the principle that an instalment order is a definite derogation from the legal right of the decree holder to immediate execution, and must only be made in exceptional circumstances. |
| Binda Prasad vs Madho Prasad and others | Allahabad High Court | Yes | (1880) ILR 2 All 129 (Allahabad High Court) | N/A | Cited for the principle that the lone fact that a defendant is hard pressed would not be a sufficient reason to make such an order. |
| TG Master Pte Ltd v Tung Kee Development (Singapore) Pte Ltd and another | High Court | Yes | [2023] SGHC 64 | Singapore | Cited for a similar application of the principle of statutory interpretation. |
| S P L R M Ramasamy Chettiar v Nordin bin Uda Shukor | Perak High Court | Yes | [1934] 1 MLJ 299 | N/A | Discusses factors considered when amending an instalment order. |
| Phan Pow v Tuck Lee Mining & Co | Kuala Lumpur High Court | Yes | [1959] 1 MLJ 32 | N/A | Discusses factors considered when granting leave to pay a judgment debt by monthly instalments. |
| Loson v Stack and another | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] EWCA Civ 803 | United Kingdom | Discusses the court's power to provide for the judgment sum to be paid by way of instalments when making the original order. |
| Lian Soon Construction Pte Ltd v Guan Qian Realty Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1053 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appeal does not operate as a stay of execution. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 59 r 2(2) |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 59 r 3(2) |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 59 r 5 |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 59 r 6A |
| Supreme Court Practice Directions 2013 Appendix G |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 45 r 1 |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 29 r 13 |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 29 r 13(3) |
| Rules of Court 2021 O 13 r 8(5) |
| Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (SI 1998 No 3132 (L.17)) (UK) r 40.11(a) |
| Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (SI 1998 No 3132 (L.17)) (UK) r 3.1(7) |
| Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (New South Wales) r 37.2 |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| State Courts Act 1970 | Singapore |
| State Courts Act 1970 s 43(1)(b) | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 s 22(2) | Singapore |
| Debtors Act (Cap 73, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Debtors Act (Cap 73, 2014 Rev Ed) s 6 | Singapore |
| Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 (c 43) (UK) s 75 | United Kingdom |
| Judgment Debt Recovery Act 1984 (Victoria) s 5(1) | Victoria |
| Judgment Debt Recovery Act 1984 (Victoria) s 5(2) | Victoria |
| Judgment Debt Recovery Act 1984 (Victoria) s 6 | Victoria |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Instalment Order
- Costs Order
- Judgment Sum
- Wee Wee Laundry Service
- Procedural Rules
- Economic Hardship
- Judgment Debtor
- Judgment Creditor
15.2 Keywords
- Costs
- Instalment Orders
- Civil Procedure
- Appeal
- Judgment
- Singapore
- High Court
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Costs
- Instalment Orders
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Costs
- Contract Law