PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE COMPANY SINGAPORE (PTE) LIMITED v PETER TAN SHOU YI

PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE COMPANY SINGAPORE (PTE) LIMITED v PETER TAN SHOU YI

Primary interrogatories asking whether the defendant was the person speaking in identified audio recordings are necessary for fair disposal and saving costs and therefore must stand; secondary interrogatories seeking provenance, dates, venues and attendee identities are not necessary at this stage and constitute fishing/ancillary evidence and must be withdrawn; interrogatory seeking identities of 'cautioned' agency leaders is not material to a fact in dispute and must be withdrawn.

Citation
[2018] SGHCR 04
Parties
Plaintiff / Respondent: Prudential Assurance Co Singapore Pte Ltd; Defendant / Applicant: Tan Shou Yi Peter
Court
High Court Registrar
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
12 April 2018
Case Number
HC/S 772/2016 ( HC/SUM 5560/2017 )
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application Under Order 26 R 3(2) Rules of Court to Withdraw Interrogatories / Pre Trial Interlocutory Hearing on Interrogatories and Authenticity Challenge
Outcome
Primary Queries (identification of speaker) upheld; Secondary Queries (provenance and attendant details) withdrawn; Final Interrogatory (identities of cautioned agency leaders) withdrawn; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Authenticity of Documentary/electronic Evidence, Admissions, Chain of Custody, Use of Expert Evidence
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Evidence Discovery Employment / Contract (non Solicitation, Fiduciary Duties) Interrogatories Authenticity of Documentary/electronic Evidence Admissions Chain of Custody +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prudential Assurance Co Singapore Pte Ltd

Plaintiff / Respondent

Tan Shou Yi Peter

Defendant / Applicant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application Under Order 26 R 3(2) Rules of Court to Withdraw Interrogatories / Pre Trial Interlocutory Hearing on Interrogatories and Authenticity Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interrogatories as to identity of speaker in audio recordings are permissible where authenticity is challenged
  2. 2 Whether secondary provenance/chain of custody questions are necessary or oppressive
  3. 3 Whether interrogatories seeking identities of persons referred to in pleaded averments are permissible or amount to fishing/requests for evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Primary interrogatories asking whether the defendant was the person speaking in identified audio recordings are necessary for fair disposal and saving costs and therefore must stand; secondary interrogatories seeking provenance, dates, venues and attendee identities are not necessary at this stage and constitute fishing/ancillary evidence and must be withdrawn; interrogatory seeking identities of 'cautioned' agency leaders is not material to a fact in dispute and must be withdrawn.

Court Disposition

Primary Queries (identification of speaker) upheld; Secondary Queries (provenance and attendant details) withdrawn; Final Interrogatory (identities of cautioned agency leaders) withdrawn; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Decline to order withdrawal of Primary Queries (questions as to whether defendant was person recorded speaking at specified timestamps).
  • Order that Secondary Queries (questions about date, venue, and identities of other attendees) be withdrawn.