Abex Centre Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor

Abex Centre Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor

The agreement was expressly subject to the State Lands Rules and the Collector lawfully terminated under r 29(1); the appellants' challenge was devoid of merit and constituted an extravagant and unnecessary use of the appeal process to delay eviction and avoid rent, therefore the court exercised its discretion under...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] SGHC 48
Parties
Appellant: Abex Centre Pte Ltd; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
28 March 2000
Case Number
MA 246/1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Withdrawn at Hearing; Costs Determined by High Court
Outcome
Appeal withdrawn; High Court ordered appellants to pay prosecution's costs in the court below and in the appeal; parties to proceed to taxation to assess costs.
Legal Topics
Costs of Prosecution, Costs of Appeal, State Lands Encroachments, Termination of Tenancy, Abuse of Process
Source Language
english
Criminal Procedure and Sentencing Property Law Administrative Law Costs of Prosecution Costs of Appeal State Lands Encroachments Termination of Tenancy Abuse of Process

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abex Centre Pte Ltd

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Withdrawn at Hearing; Costs Determined by High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants should be ordered to pay prosecution's costs under s 401(1) CPC for costs below
  2. 2 Whether appellants should be ordered to pay prosecution's costs of the appeal under s 262(1) CPC
  3. 3 Whether the Collector validly terminated the tenancy under r 29(1) State Lands Rules

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement was expressly subject to the State Lands Rules and the Collector lawfully terminated under r 29(1); the appellants' challenge was devoid of merit and constituted an extravagant and unnecessary use of the appeal process to delay eviction and avoid rent, therefore the court exercised its discretion under s 401(1) and s 262(1) CPC to order the appellants to pay the prosecution's costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal withdrawn; High Court ordered appellants to pay prosecution's costs in the court below and in the appeal; parties to proceed to taxation to assess costs.

Orders

  • Leave granted to withdraw the appeal.
  • Appellants ordered to pay the prosecution's costs incurred in the court below under s 401(1) Criminal Procedure Code.