LAGUNA NATIONAL GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) & 2 Ors v Peter Kwee Seng Chio & 3 Ors
Permission to withdraw the summons was granted; however, the proposed amendment to the default judgment was substantive because it sought to expand the asset subject to substitutive compensation beyond what the perfected default judgment had been entered for, and thus did not give effect to the court's intention at the time the default judgment was made; ROC 2021 O 3 r 2(2) and the court's inherent jurisdiction do not operate to permit substantive amendments that alter parties' rights contrary to the manifest intention when judgment was entered; accordingly, had the summons not been withdrawn the application to amend would have been dismissed.
- Citation
- [2026] SGHCR 15
- Parties
- Claimant: Laguna National Golf and Country Club Ltd (in liquidation); Claimant: Cameron Lindsay Duncan; Claimant: David Dong-Won Kim; Defendant: Peter Kwee Seng Chio; Defendant: Kwee Chin Wei Kevin; Defendant: Laguna Hotel Holdings Pte Ltd; Defendant: Kwee Hui Ling, Karen (a Bankrupt)
- Court
- High Court Registrar
- Jurisdiction
- Singapore
- Judgment Date
- 13 May 2026
- Case Number
- HC/OC 262/2025 ( HC/SUM 733/2026 )
- Procedural Posture
- Originating Claim No 262 of 2025 / Summons No 733 of 2026 (application to Amend Default Judgment; Withdrawn)
- Outcome
- Application granted to withdraw summons; on merits the proposed amendment would have been refused and the summons dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Judgments, Default Judgment, Setting Aside Default Judgment, Substitutive Compensation, Withdrawal of Summons, Rules of Court 2014 V Rules of Court 2021
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Laguna National Golf and Country Club Ltd (in liquidation)
Claimant
Cameron Lindsay Duncan
Claimant
David Dong-Won Kim
Claimant
Peter Kwee Seng Chio
Defendant
Kwee Chin Wei Kevin
Defendant
Laguna Hotel Holdings Pte Ltd
Defendant
Kwee Hui Ling, Karen (a Bankrupt)
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Originating Claim No 262 of 2025 / Summons No 733 of 2026 (application to Amend Default Judgment; Withdrawn)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether court may amend a default judgment after judgment perfected and under ROC 2021
- 2 Whether O 3 r 2(2) ROC 2021 expands court's power to make substantive amendments to judgments
- 3 Whether the proposed amendment was substantive or clarificatory
Ratio Decidendi
Permission to withdraw the summons was granted; however, the proposed amendment to the default judgment was substantive because it sought to expand the asset subject to substitutive compensation beyond what the perfected default judgment had been entered for, and thus did not give effect to the court's intention at the time the default judgment was made; ROC 2021 O 3 r 2(2) and the court's inherent jurisdiction do not operate to permit substantive amendments that alter parties' rights contrary to the manifest intention when judgment was entered; accordingly, had the summons not been withdrawn the application to amend would have been dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application granted to withdraw summons; on merits the proposed amendment would have been refused and the summons dismissed.
Orders
- Permission granted to withdraw HC/SUM 733/2026 (without prejudice to claimants' rights)
- Had the summons not been withdrawn, the application to amend the Default Judgment would have been dismissed and the proposed amendment refused
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