THIRD EYE CAPITAL CORPORATION v PRETTY VIEW SHIPPING S.A. & 2 Ors

THIRD EYE CAPITAL CORPORATION v PRETTY VIEW SHIPPING S.A. & 2 Ors

The court held that permission was required because the RMI Application is not a related enforcement proceeding; on a balancing exercise the public interest in enabling Third Eye to use the EJD Information to pursue a legitimate means of satisfying the awards outweighed interests protected by the Riddick undertaking; there was no abuse of process and no irremediable prejudice to the Defendants, and permission was granted to use both the transcripts and the EJD affidavits in the RMI Application.

Citation
[2024] SGHC 96
Parties
Claimant: Third Eye Capital Corporation; Defendant: Pretty View Shipping SA; Defendant: Pretty Urban Shipping SA; Defendant: Parakou Tankers Inc
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
3 April 2024
Case Number
HC/OS 207/2022 ( HC/SUM 245/2024 )
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons (enforcement/examination Proceedings) / Application for Permission to Use Compelled Disclosure in Foreign Proceedings
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Riddick Principle, Disclosure Under Examination Before the Registrar (ejd), Enforcement of Foreign Awards, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Abuse of Process
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Enforcement Company Law Private International Law Evidence Riddick Principle Disclosure Under Examination Before the Registrar (ejd) Enforcement of Foreign Awards +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Third Eye Capital Corporation

Claimant

Pretty View Shipping SA

Defendant

Pretty Urban Shipping SA

Defendant

Parakou Tankers Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons (enforcement/examination Proceedings) / Application for Permission to Use Compelled Disclosure in Foreign Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents and information obtained under compulsion (EJD Information) fall within the Riddick undertaking and require the court's permission to be used in foreign proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the intended RMI Application is a related enforcement proceeding exempting it from the need for permission
  3. 3 Whether permission to use the EJD Information should be granted after balancing competing public interests and potential prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that permission was required because the RMI Application is not a related enforcement proceeding; on a balancing exercise the public interest in enabling Third Eye to use the EJD Information to pursue a legitimate means of satisfying the awards outweighed interests protected by the Riddick undertaking; there was no abuse of process and no irremediable prejudice to the Defendants, and permission was granted to use both the transcripts and the EJD affidavits in the RMI Application.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Permission granted for Third Eye Capital Corporation to use all EJD Information (transcripts and EJD affidavits) in the RMI Application seeking to pierce Parakou’s corporate veil and hold Liu personally liable
  • Defendants to pay costs fixed at S$15,000 with disbursements to be agreed by the parties