B2C2 LTD v QUOINE PTE. LTD. [2018] SGHC(I) 8 (18 July 2018)

B2C2 LTD v QUOINE PTE. LTD. [2018] SGHC(I) 8 (18 July 2018)

In a case transferred from the High Court to the SICC, the fact that the plaintiff is ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction is a threshold condition for security for costs. However, on the facts, the Plaintiff is an established company with a record of compliance, and enforcement in the UK would not be unduly difficult. The balance of factors does not justify ordering further security for costs.

Citation
[2018] SGHC(I) 8
Parties
Plaintiff: B2C2 Ltd; Defendant: Quoine Pte Ltd
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
18 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Security for Costs Application in Ongoing Commercial Litigation (sicc Transfer Case) / Interlocutory Application, Judgment on Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for further security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Costs, Jurisdictional Transfer, Foreign Plaintiff
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Costs Jurisdictional Transfer Foreign Plaintiff

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 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B2C2 Ltd

Plaintiff

Quoine Pte Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Security for Costs Application in Ongoing Commercial Litigation (sicc Transfer Case) / Interlocutory Application, Judgment on Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against a foreign plaintiff in a case transferred from the High Court to the SICC
  2. 2 Interpretation of O 110 r 45 of the Rules in transfer cases
  3. 3 Whether the fact of foreign incorporation/residence is a sufficient threshold for security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

In a case transferred from the High Court to the SICC, the fact that the plaintiff is ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction is a threshold condition for security for costs. However, on the facts, the Plaintiff is an established company with a record of compliance, and enforcement in the UK would not be unduly difficult. The balance of factors does not justify ordering further security for costs.

Court Disposition

Application for further security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • No further security for costs ordered; issue of costs to be addressed at next case management conference