Tan Wei Heng Kelvin v Tok Beng Tong: Forum Non Conveniens in Investment Dispute

The High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by Tok Beng Tong and Hendro Tok against the decision to dismiss their application for a stay of proceedings in OC 385/2023, a case brought by Tan Wei Heng Kelvin and Langgeng Sugiarto concerning a dispute over an oral agreement related to an investment in a Malaysian property development. The court allowed the appeal, ordering a stay of proceedings in favor of the Malaysian courts based on the principle of forum non conveniens, finding that Malaysia was the more appropriate forum for the trial.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed for the proceedings in OC 385 to be stayed on the ground of forum non conveniens.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore court stays proceedings in favor of Malaysian courts due to forum non conveniens in a dispute over an oral investment agreement.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Tan Wei Heng KelvinClaimant, RespondentIndividualAppeal AllowedLost
Langgeng SugiartoClaimant, RespondentIndividualAppeal AllowedLost
Tok Beng TongDefendant, AppellantIndividualAppeal AllowedWon
Hendro TokDefendant, AppellantIndividualAppeal AllowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lee Seiu KinJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Zhuang WenxiongLVM Law Chambers LLC
Li JiabaoLVM Law Chambers LLC
Qabir Singh SandhuLVM Law Chambers LLC
Bertrice Hsu Li-JiaLVM Law Chambers LLC
Patrick Ong Kok SengPatrick Ong Law LLC

4. Facts

  1. Claimants and Defendants entered into an oral agreement on 8 October 2012 for investment in a Malaysian property development.
  2. The claimants paid RM2,307,744.74 to a Malaysian company as an investment sum.
  3. The claimants alleged breach of the oral agreement and negligence by the defendants.
  4. The defendants sought a stay of proceedings in Singapore in favor of Malaysian courts based on forum non conveniens.
  5. The Assistant Registrar dismissed the stay application, which the defendants appealed.
  6. The property development, Permas City Development, is located in Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
  7. The parties are based in Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Tan Wei Heng Kelvin and another v Tok Beng Tong and another, Originating Claim No 385 of 2023 (Registrar’s Appeal No 193 of 2023), [2023] SGHC 352

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Claimants and Defendants entered into an oral agreement.
Claimants paid an investment sum of RM2,307,744.74.
Statement of Claim dated.
Defence (Jurisdiction) dated.
Defendants filed SUM 2259.
SUM 2259 was heard before the Assistant Registrar.
Defendants filed their notice of appeal.
Judgment reserved.
Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Forum Non Conveniens
    • Outcome: The court held that Malaysia was the more appropriate forum and allowed the appeal, staying the proceedings in Singapore.
    • Category: Jurisdictional
    • Related Cases:
      • [1987] AC 460
      • [2017] 2 SLR 265

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Stay of Proceedings

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation
  • Forum Non Conveniens

11. Industries

  • Real Estate
  • Construction

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd (The Spiliada)N/AYes[1987] AC 460N/ACited for the test to determine the appropriate forum in forum non conveniens applications.
Rappo, Tania v Accent Delight International Ltd and another and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2017] 2 SLR 265SingaporeCited for the explanation of the Spiliada test involving two stages.
Rickshaw Investments Ltd and another v Nicolai Baron von UexkullN/AYes[2007] 1 SLR(R) 377SingaporeCited for factors to be considered in balancing competing interests in forum non conveniens analysis.
CIMB Bank Bhd v Dresdner Kleinwort LtdN/AYes[2008] 4 SLR(R) 543SingaporeCited for the burden on the defendant to demonstrate a more appropriate forum.
Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar v Jhaveri Darsan JitendraCourt of AppealNo[2019] 2 SLR 372SingaporeCited for the limited weight to be placed on the factor of the place of breach.
Pacific Recreation Pte Ltd v S Y Technology Inc and another appealN/AYes[2008] 2 SLR(R) 491SingaporeCited for the three-step approach to determine the governing law of a contract.
Overseas Union Insurance Ltd v Turegum Insurance CoN/AYes[2001] 2 SLR(R) 285SingaporeCited for the three-step approach to determine the governing law of a contract.
Chatenay v The Brazilian Submarine Telegraph Company, LimitedN/AYes[1891] 1 QB 79N/ACited for the place of contracting is generally not important in determining the governing law of a contract.
JIO Minerals FZC and others v Mineral Enterprises LtdN/AYes[2011] 1 SLR 391SingaporeCited for the place where the tort was alleged to have occurred.
Distillers Co (Biochemicals) Ltd v Laura Anne ThompsonN/AYes[1971] AC 458N/ACited for the test that is commonly applied for determining the place of the tort.
Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse Trust LtdN/AYes[2020] 2 SLR 638SingaporeCited for the location of documents to become a relevant connecting factor.

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

  • Forum Non Conveniens
  • Oral Agreement
  • Investment Sum
  • Permas City Development
  • Phase Two Development
  • Buana Tunggal Sdn Bhd

15.2 Keywords

  • Forum Non Conveniens
  • Singapore
  • Malaysia
  • Oral Agreement
  • Investment
  • Property Development

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Forum Non Conveniens90
Private International Law80
Jurisdiction75
Contract Law60
Breach of Contract50
Oral Agreement45
Negligence40

16. Subjects

  • Civil Litigation
  • Forum Non Conveniens
  • Contract Law