Teo Han Siang v Lim Eng Keong

Teo Han Siang v Lim Eng Keong

Claim struck out because claimant had repeatedly and solemnly affirmed in three Family Justice Court affidavits that the disputed S$250,000 were investments and that no loan was owing; those sworn statements were fundamentally inconsistent with the loan-based claim in the present suit, the claimant offered no cogent explanation for resiling, and his prior concealment of those affidavits aggravated the abuse; permitting the claim to proceed would misuse court process and offend the interests of justice, so striking out under O 9 r 16 was warranted.

Citation
[2026] SGHCR 12
Parties
Claimant: Teo Han Siang; Defendant and Counterclaimant: Lim Eng Keong; Defendant (discontinued): Ecube Auto Credit Pte Ltd
Court
High Court Registrar
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
15 April 2026
Case Number
MC/OC 2048/2026 ( HC/SUM 1504/2025,HC/SUM 416/2026,HC/SUM 1011/2025,HC/SUM 2630/2025,HC/SUM 2629/2025 )
Procedural Posture
Originating Claim No 51 of 2025 / Striking Out Application Decided (sum 1011 Under O 9 R 16 ROC 2021)
Outcome
Claimant's originating claim against Lim Eng Keong struck out as an abuse of process and in the interests of justice.
Legal Topics
Affidavits, Abuse of Process, Striking Out, Interests of Justice, Approbation and Reprobation
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Affidavits Abuse of Process Striking Out Interests of Justice Approbation and Reprobation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Teo Han Siang

Claimant

Lim Eng Keong

Defendant and Counterclaimant

Ecube Auto Credit Pte Ltd

Defendant (discontinued)

Procedural Posture

Originating Claim No 51 of 2025 / Striking Out Application Decided (sum 1011 Under O 9 R 16 ROC 2021)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's originating claim should be struck out as an abuse of process due to prior inconsistent sworn affidavits
  2. 2 Whether it is in the interests of justice to strike out the claim
  3. 3 Whether prior affidavits, though given in separate family proceedings and settled, bind the claimant in subsequent civil proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Claim struck out because claimant had repeatedly and solemnly affirmed in three Family Justice Court affidavits that the disputed S$250,000 were investments and that no loan was owing; those sworn statements were fundamentally inconsistent with the loan-based claim in the present suit, the claimant offered no cogent explanation for resiling, and his prior concealment of those affidavits aggravated the abuse; permitting the claim to proceed would misuse court process and offend the interests of justice, so striking out under O 9 r 16 was warranted.

Court Disposition

Claimant's originating claim against Lim Eng Keong struck out as an abuse of process and in the interests of justice.

Orders

  • Claimant's originating claim struck out (SUM 1011 allowed)
  • Costs ordered in favour of defendant on an indemnity basis