Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet: Appeal on Costs Decision and Requirements for Permission to Appeal

In Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet, the Appellate Division of the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by Chan Pik Sun for permission to appeal a decision on costs. The court clarified when costs are considered fixed or assessed for appeal purposes and granted Chan Pik Sun permission to appeal the Costs Decision. The court directed that the appeal on the Costs Decision be heard together with AD 50.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Appellate Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Permission to appeal the Costs Decision granted.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The court granted Chan Pik Sun permission to appeal the costs decision, clarifying the requirements for permission to appeal when appealing costs.

1.7 Decision Date

16 November 2023

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Chan Pik Sun	Applicant	Individual	Permission to appeal the Costs Decision granted	Partial	Lee Sien Liang Joseph of LVM Law Chambers LLC Lok Vi Ming SC of LVM Law Chambers LLC Clara Lim Ai Ying of LVM Law Chambers LLC Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan of LVM Law Chambers LLC
Wan Hoe Keet (Wen Haojie)	Respondent	Individual	Respondents' position upheld	Won	Lim Yi Zheng of Advocatus Law LLP Christopher Anand s/o Daniel of Advocatus Law LLP Harjean Kaur of Advocatus Law LLP Yeo Yi Ling Eileen of Advocatus Law LLP Saadhvika Jayanth of Advocatus Law LLP
Ho Sally	Respondent	Individual	Respondents' position upheld	Won	Lim Yi Zheng of Advocatus Law LLP Christopher Anand s/o Daniel of Advocatus Law LLP Harjean Kaur of Advocatus Law LLP Yeo Yi Ling Eileen of Advocatus Law LLP Saadhvika Jayanth of Advocatus Law LLP
Ho Hao Tian Sebastian	Respondent	Individual	Respondents' position upheld	Won	Lim Yi Zheng of Advocatus Law LLP Christopher Anand s/o Daniel of Advocatus Law LLP Harjean Kaur of Advocatus Law LLP Yeo Yi Ling Eileen of Advocatus Law LLP Saadhvika Jayanth of Advocatus Law LLP
Strategic Wealth Consultancy Pte Ltd	Respondent	Corporation	Respondents' position upheld	Won	Lim Yi Zheng of Advocatus Law LLP Christopher Anand s/o Daniel of Advocatus Law LLP Harjean Kaur of Advocatus Law LLP Yeo Yi Ling Eileen of Advocatus Law LLP Saadhvika Jayanth of Advocatus Law LLP

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Woo Bih Li	Judge of the Appellate Division	Yes
Kannan Ramesh	Judge of the Appellate Division	No

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Lee Sien Liang Joseph	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Lok Vi Ming SC	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Clara Lim Ai Ying	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan	LVM Law Chambers LLC
Lim Yi Zheng	Advocatus Law LLP
Christopher Anand s/o Daniel	Advocatus Law LLP
Harjean Kaur	Advocatus Law LLP
Yeo Yi Ling Eileen	Advocatus Law LLP
Saadhvika Jayanth	Advocatus Law LLP

4. Facts

The Judge dismissed all the claims of the Applicant against the Respondents in Suit 806.
The Judge awarded the Respondents costs to be assessed, if not agreed.
The Applicant filed an appeal against the Main Decision.
The Respondents argued that the time for filing an appeal had not begun.
The Judge determined the quantum of costs in the Costs Decision.
The Applicant filed the PTA Application in respect of the Costs Decision.

5. Formal Citations

Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet and others, Originating Application No 46 of 2023, [2023] SGHC(A) 36

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2018-01-01	Suit No 806 of 2018 filed
2023-04-14	Judge dismissed all claims of the Applicant in Suit 806 and awarded costs to the Respondents.
2023-05-11	Applicant filed an appeal against the Main Decision.
2023-05-17	Lawyers for the Respondents wrote to the court stating that the time for filing an appeal had not begun.
2023-05-18	Lawyers for the Applicant wrote to court expressing their disagreement.
2023-07-06	Assistant Registrar informed the parties that the Judge was of the view that the time to file an appeal ran from 14 April 2023.
2023-09-11	Judge determined the quantum of costs (Costs Decision).
2023-09-25	Applicant filed the PTA Application in respect of the Costs Decision.
2023-11-17	Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

Whether the lower court ordered costs to be fixed or assessed for the purpose of starting the time for filing of an appeal
- Outcome: The court clarified when costs should be regarded as being fixed or assessed.
- Category: Procedural
Whether applicant must have satisfied the usual grounds for obtaining permission to appeal on costs when such appeal may be heard together with the appeal on the merits of the claims
- Outcome: The court held that in the situation envisaged by The “Luna”, a party seeking permission to appeal would generally not have to satisfy the usual requirements for permission to appeal.
- Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

Permission to appeal the Costs Decision

9. Cause of Actions

No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

Appellate Litigation
Civil Litigation

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet and others	High Court	Yes	[2023] SGHC 96	Singapore	Cited for the Judge's decision dismissing the claims and awarding costs.
The “Luna” and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2021] 2 SLR 1054	Singapore	Cited regarding the requirements for obtaining permission to appeal when appealing costs.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Rules of Court 2021

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Costs
Permission to appeal
Assessment of costs
Fixed costs
Split decisions
Time for filing of an appeal

15.2 Keywords

Costs
Appeal
Civil Procedure
Singapore
Permission to appeal

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Costs	95
Civil Procedure	90
Appellate Practice	80
Appeal	70

16. Subjects

Civil Procedure
Appeals
Costs