Deutsche Bank AG v Lee Yung-Te: Extension of Originating Application Validity
In Deutsche Bank AG v Lee Yung-Te, the Singapore International Commercial Court addressed the claimant's application to extend the validity of an Originating Application against the defendant, seeking over HK$32,000,000 under loan facilities. The court, presided over by Judge Roger Giles, considered the claimant's reasons for delayed service, including settlement negotiations and concerns regarding related Hong Kong proceedings initiated by the defendant. Ultimately, the court granted a two-month extension for the Originating Application's validity, balancing the need for prompt action with the ongoing settlement prospects.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL COURT1.2 Outcome
Originating Application validity extended for two months.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Oral Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Deutsche Bank AG seeks to extend the validity of its Originating Application against Lee Yung-Te. The court grants a two-month extension for service.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft | Claimant | Corporation | Application granted in part | Partial | |
| Lee Yung-Te | Defendant | Individual | Application granted | Neutral |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Roger Giles | International Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Ker Yanguang | Prolegis LLC |
| Carrisa Low | Prolegis LLC |
4. Facts
- The claimant, Deutsche Bank AG, claims over HK$32,000,000 from the defendant, Lee Yung-Te, under loan facilities.
- The Originating Application was filed on 30 January 2024.
- The claimant did not serve the Originating Application due to settlement negotiations.
- The defendant commenced proceedings in Hong Kong against the claimant.
- The Hong Kong proceedings writ expired on 20 December 2024 without being served on the claimant.
- The claimant revived settlement negotiations on 23 December 2024.
- The defendant was unavailable to respond to the settlement offer until after the Originating Application's expiry.
5. Formal Citations
- Deutsche Bank AG v Lee Yung-Te, Originating Application No 2 of 2024 (Summons No 4 of 2025), [2025] SGHC(I) 2
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Originating Application filed | |
| Mediation Commenced | |
| Hong Kong writ expired | |
| Claimant revived without prejudice negotiations | |
| Claimant filed application to extend validity of Originating Application | |
| Hearing on the application to extend validity of Originating Application | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Extension of validity of originating application
- Outcome: The court granted a two-month extension for the Originating Application's validity.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Debt Claim
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Banking
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lim Hong Kan and others v Mohd Sainudin bin Ahmad | High Court | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR(R) 108 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the power of extension should only be exercised for good reason. |
| Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Barbrak Ltd, The Myrto (No 3) | N/A | Yes | [1987] AC 597 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the power of extension should only be exercised for good reason. |
| The Mouna | N/A | No | [1991] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 221 | N/A | Cited as a strong example where renewal was refused even when a limitation period had expired while the parties were negotiating. |
| The “Nur Allya” | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHCR 12 | Singapore | Cited for the expression of a good reason, that the circumstances were such as to lead a reasonable plaintiff to think that it is unnecessary to serve the writ and to do so would increase the costs in a manner which is unwarranted in the circumstances. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 4 Rule 3(1) of the Singapore International Commercial Court Rules 2021 |
| Order 4 Rule 3(3) of the Singapore International Commercial Court Rules 2021 |
| Order 1 Rule 3(1)(a) of the SICC Rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Singapore International Commercial Court Rules 2021 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Originating Application
- Extension of Validity
- Settlement Negotiations
- Without Prejudice
- Hong Kong Proceedings
- Loan Facilities
15.2 Keywords
- Originating Application
- Extension
- Validity
- Singapore International Commercial Court
- Settlement Negotiations
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Litigation | 80 |
| Civil Litigation | 75 |
| Extension of Validity | 65 |
| Banking and Finance | 60 |
| Contracts | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Extension of Time