DKB v DKC [2024] SGHC(I) 31 (25 October 2024)
Having granted leave for expert evidence on English law, it would be inappropriate and contrary to the SICC Rules to also allow oral submissions by foreign counsel on the same issues; parties must elect either submissions or proof, not both.
- Citation
- [2024] SGHC(I) 31
- Parties
- Claimant: DKB; Defendant: DKC
- Jurisdiction
- Singapore
- Judgment Date
- 25 October 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Originating Application / Interlocutory Application (summons) for Leave to Allow Foreign Counsel to Make Submissions on English Law
- Outcome
- Application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Foreign Law Determination, Stay of Proceedings, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Expert Evidence, Submissions Vs Proof of Foreign Law
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
DKB
Claimant
DKC
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Originating Application / Interlocutory Application (summons) for Leave to Allow Foreign Counsel to Make Submissions on English Law
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should allow foreign counsel to make oral submissions on English law after expert reports have been filed
- 2 Whether foreign law should be determined by submissions or proof (expert evidence) under SICC Rules
Ratio Decidendi
Having granted leave for expert evidence on English law, it would be inappropriate and contrary to the SICC Rules to also allow oral submissions by foreign counsel on the same issues; parties must elect either submissions or proof, not both.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed with costs
Orders
- Application for leave to allow foreign counsel to make submissions on English law is dismissed
- Costs awarded against the applicant
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment