LONG KIM WING v LTX-CREDENCE SINGAPORE PTE. LTD.

LONG KIM WING v LTX-CREDENCE SINGAPORE PTE. LTD.

The Plaintiff's purported acceptance of the OTS was invalid because it was made after the court's judgment and after the time to appeal had lapsed; the OTS was not a genuine offer to settle all claims and counterclaims and therefore could not be relied upon to claim indemnity costs; although the Plaintiff's conduct included an egregious unproven allegation, it was not egregious throughout the trial, and on the net outcome the Defendant was the true successful party and was entitled to 80% of standard costs, quantified at $90,400, plus disbursements to be agreed or fixed.

Citation
[2017] SGHC 312
Parties
Plaintiff; Defendant in Counterclaim: Long Kim Wing; Defendant; Plaintiff in Counterclaim: LTX-Credence Singapore Pte Ltd
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
7 December 2017
Case Number
S 906/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit (action and Counterclaim) — Suit No 906 of 2014 / Judgment and Costs Determination (supplementary Judgment)
Outcome
SUM 5347 dismissed; Plaintiff's purported acceptance of the OTS held invalid; Plaintiff ordered to pay Defendant costs of the action amounting to 80% of standard costs; costs for disbursements to be agreed or fixed; costs of SUM 5347 reserved.
Legal Topics
Offer to Settle, Indemnity Costs, Standard Party and Party Costs, Wrongful Dismissal, Counterclaim Set Off
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Costs Employment Law Settlement/mediation Offer to Settle Indemnity Costs Standard Party and Party Costs Wrongful Dismissal +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Long Kim Wing

Plaintiff; Defendant in Counterclaim

LTX-Credence Singapore Pte Ltd

Defendant; Plaintiff in Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit (action and Counterclaim) — Suit No 906 of 2014 / Judgment and Costs Determination (supplementary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff's purported acceptance of the Offer to Settle (OTS) was valid when made after judgment and after the appeal period
  2. 2 Whether the OTS was a genuine offer to settle all claims and counterclaims and could found a claim for indemnity costs
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff's conduct justified an award of indemnity costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff's purported acceptance of the OTS was invalid because it was made after the court's judgment and after the time to appeal had lapsed; the OTS was not a genuine offer to settle all claims and counterclaims and therefore could not be relied upon to claim indemnity costs; although the Plaintiff's conduct included an egregious unproven allegation, it was not egregious throughout the trial, and on the net outcome the Defendant was the true successful party and was entitled to 80% of standard costs, quantified at $90,400, plus disbursements to be agreed or fixed.

Court Disposition

SUM 5347 dismissed; Plaintiff's purported acceptance of the OTS held invalid; Plaintiff ordered to pay Defendant costs of the action amounting to 80% of standard costs; costs for disbursements to be agreed or fixed; costs of SUM 5347 reserved.

Orders

  • SUM 5347 dismissed
  • The Plaintiff's purported acceptance of the Offer to Settle dated 12 October 2016 is invalid