La Comida Buds Bar & Bistro Pte Ltd v Layan Management Pte Ltd: Security for Costs Application
In La Comida Buds Bar & Bistro Pte Ltd v Layan Management Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by the Defendant, Layan Management Pte Ltd, against the dismissal of its application for security for costs. The underlying claim, HC/OC 166/2023, involves a dispute over a tenancy agreement. The court, presided over by Choo Han Teck J, dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence to suggest that the Claimant, La Comida Buds Bar & Bistro Pte Ltd, would be unable to pay the Defendant's costs. The costs of the appeal were reserved to the trial judge.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs reserved to the trial judge.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding security for costs in a tenancy dispute. The court dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence that the claimant could not pay costs.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| La Comida Buds Bar & Bistro Pte Ltd | Claimant, Respondent | Corporation | Appeal dismissed | Won | Govindaraju s/o Sinnappan |
| Layan Management Pte Ltd | Defendant, Appellant | Corporation | Appeal dismissed | Lost | Kanthosamy Rajendran, Jeyabal Athavan |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Govindaraju s/o Sinnappan | Raj Govin Law Practice |
| Kanthosamy Rajendran | RLC Law Corporation |
| Jeyabal Athavan | RLC Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- La Comida Buds Bar & Bistro Pte Ltd filed a claim against Layan Management Pte Ltd regarding a tenancy agreement.
- The claimant refused to sign a new tenancy agreement without a novation agreement.
- The claimant was allegedly evicted from the premises by the defendant.
- The defendant applied for security for costs, arguing the claimant might not be able to pay.
- The Assistant Registrar dismissed the defendant's application.
- The defendant appealed the dismissal of its application for security for costs.
5. Formal Citations
- La Comida Buds Bar & Bistro Pte Ltd v Layan Management Pte Ltd, Originating Claim No 166 of 2023(Registrar’s Appeal No 20 of 2024), [2024] SGHC 67
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Tenancy agreement signed | |
| Eviction notice issued | |
| Premises found locked | |
| Claim filed by way of HC/OC 166/2023 | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Security for costs
- Outcome: The court dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence that the claimant would be unable to pay the costs of the defendant.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Wrongful termination of tenancy (assumed)
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
11. Industries
- Hospitality
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No cited cases | |||||
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| O 9 r 12(1)(c) of the Rules of Court 2021 |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Companies Act 1967 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Tenancy agreement
- Security for costs
- Eviction
- Novation agreement
15.2 Keywords
- Tenancy
- Security for costs
- Singapore
- High Court
- Appeal
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Tenancy Dispute
17. Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Costs
- Security for Costs