Keppel Tatlee Bank Limited v Bandung Shipping Pte Ltd

Keppel Tatlee Bank Limited v Bandung Shipping Pte Ltd

The pleadings, as amended, disclosed a cause of action and therefore the application under O 18 r 19(1)(a) failed because evidence is inadmissible on that ground; defendants could not rely on affidavits to circumvent that prohibition; where a bona fide dispute of law exists the claim is not properly struck out as scandalous, frivolous or an abuse of process; the correct route for resolution of the contested legal question was by appropriate preliminary hearing (O 14 r 12) rather than by strike-out.

Citation
[2002] SGHC 47
Parties
Plaintiff Appellant: Keppel Tatlee Bank Limited; Defendant Respondent: Bandung Shipping Pte Ltd
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
9 March 2002
Case Number
Adm 600151/2001, RA 600177/2001
Procedural Posture
Admiralty in Personam / Appeal From Deputy Registrar's Strike Out Order (application Under O 18 R 19)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Deputy Registrar's order striking out the action set aside; certain parts of the Statement of Claim struck out; cost order below set aside; plaintiffs awarded costs of the appeal and of the hearing below; action reinstated in Admiralty in Personam No. 600151/2001.
Legal Topics
Bills of Lading, Endorsement in Blank, Holder of Bill of Lading, Strike Out Under O 18 R 19, Preliminary Points of Law (o 14 R 12)
Source Language
English
Admiralty Contract Civil Procedure Maritime Law Bills of Lading Endorsement in Blank Holder of Bill of Lading Strike Out Under O 18 R 19 +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keppel Tatlee Bank Limited

Plaintiff Appellant

Bandung Shipping Pte Ltd

Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Admiralty in Personam / Appeal From Deputy Registrar's Strike Out Order (application Under O 18 R 19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statement of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action under O 18 r 19(1)(a)
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs were lawful holders of the bills of lading within the meaning of the Bills of Lading Act s 5(2)(b)
  3. 3 Whether affidavit evidence is admissible on a strike-out application under O 18 r 19(1)(a)

Ratio Decidendi

The pleadings, as amended, disclosed a cause of action and therefore the application under O 18 r 19(1)(a) failed because evidence is inadmissible on that ground; defendants could not rely on affidavits to circumvent that prohibition; where a bona fide dispute of law exists the claim is not properly struck out as scandalous, frivolous or an abuse of process; the correct route for resolution of the contested legal question was by appropriate preliminary hearing (O 14 r 12) rather than by strike-out.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Deputy Registrar's order striking out the action set aside; certain parts of the Statement of Claim struck out; cost order below set aside; plaintiffs awarded costs of the appeal and of the hearing below; action reinstated in Admiralty in Personam No. 600151/2001.

Orders

  • Deputy Registrar's order striking out the action set aside
  • Certain parts of the Statement of Claim struck out