Hsing Mei Construction Pte Ltd v Lim Check Meng

Hsing Mei Construction Pte Ltd v Lim Check Meng

The judge formed a provisional view that the defendant had no real prospect of successfully defending the claim for progress payments and retention due to contradictions, lack of credible evidence and conduct inconsistent with alleged termination, so that part of the default judgment remained; however there was a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] SGHC 75
Parties
Plaintiff: Hsing Mei Construction Pte Ltd; Defendant: Lim Check Meng
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
28 April 2000
Case Number
Suit 326/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Dispute — Construction Contract / Debt Recovery / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment (appeal From Sar)
Outcome
Final judgment partially upheld and partially set aside
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Judgment, Liquidated Damages, Extension of Time, Progress Payments and Retention, Characterisation of Payments (loan V Repayment)
Source Language
english
Contract Civil Procedure Construction Law Debt Recovery Setting Aside Default Judgment Liquidated Damages Extension of Time Progress Payments and Retention +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hsing Mei Construction Pte Ltd

Plaintiff

Lim Check Meng

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Dispute — Construction Contract / Debt Recovery / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment (appeal From Sar)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant has a meritorious defence sufficient to set aside a regularly obtained default judgment
  2. 2 Whether certified Delay and Termination of Delay certificates and unsigned meeting minutes established that liquidated damages were waived
  3. 3 Whether sums paid to the defendant were loans from the plaintiff or repayments of loans advanced by the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The judge formed a provisional view that the defendant had no real prospect of successfully defending the claim for progress payments and retention due to contradictions, lack of credible evidence and conduct inconsistent with alleged termination, so that part of the default judgment remained; however there was a plausible defence to the claim characterised as an interest‑free loan because the plaintiff produced insufficient documentary evidence, so that part of the judgment was set aside and the defendant granted leave to defend upon providing security.

Court Disposition

Final judgment partially upheld and partially set aside

Orders

  • Final judgment for $194300 and the costs awarded by the Senior Assistant Registrar to stand.
  • Judgment for $159520 set aside and defendant granted leave to file a defence provided he furnishes a bank guarantee or suitable security in that sum.