Bounty Resources Armenia Ltd v Li Haidong
Leave to adduce the three further affidavits was refused because the expert opinions did not raise issues requiring foreign expert elucidation and the defendant's third affidavit was not credible; on the appeal, the defendant was precluded from challenging the plaintiff's authority to sue because he had acquiesced/consented by his conduct and negotiations with the plaintiff's director, and he failed to establish a prima facie defence or credible grounds to set aside the default judgment; accordingly both the summons for further affidavits and the registrar's appeal were dismissed with costs.
- Citation
- [2015] SGHC 188
- Parties
- Plaintiff/respondent: Bounty Resources Armenia Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Li Haidong
- Court
- General Division of the High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Singapore
- Judgment Date
- 21 July 2015
- Case Number
- Suit No 1102 of 2014 (Registrar's Appeal No 114 of 2015 and Summons No 2282 of 2015)
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Litigation — Claim on Guarantee and Enforcement of Loan; Registrar's Appeal Against Assistant Registrar's Dismissal of Application to Set Aside Default Judgment; Summons for Leave to Adduce Further Affidavits / High Court Decision on Registrar's Appeal No 114 of 2015 and Summons No 2282 of 2015 (appeal From Ar; Interlocutory Applications Heard Together)
- Outcome
- Registrar's Appeal No 114 of 2015 dismissed; Summons No 2282 of 2015 (leave to adduce further affidavits) dismissed; application to set aside Default Judgment dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Setting Aside Default Judgment, Directors' Authority and Duomatic Principle, Admission of Fresh Evidence (ladd V Marshall), Interpretation of Facility Agreement (cl 8.2), Enforcement of Guarantee
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bounty Resources Armenia Ltd
Plaintiff/respondent
Li Haidong
Defendant/appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Litigation — Claim on Guarantee and Enforcement of Loan; Registrar's Appeal Against Assistant Registrar's Dismissal of Application to Set Aside Default Judgment; Summons for Leave to Adduce Further Affidavits / High Court Decision on Registrar's Appeal No 114 of 2015 and Summons No 2282 of 2015 (appeal From Ar; Interlocutory Applications Heard Together)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave should be granted to adduce fresh affidavits including foreign expert evidence and new factual material
- 2 Whether the Default Judgment should be set aside under Order 13 r 8
- 3 Whether the plaintiff had authority to commence the action and whether the defendant was precluded from raising lack of authority (Duomatic principle/acquiescence)
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to adduce the three further affidavits was refused because the expert opinions did not raise issues requiring foreign expert elucidation and the defendant's third affidavit was not credible; on the appeal, the defendant was precluded from challenging the plaintiff's authority to sue because he had acquiesced/consented by his conduct and negotiations with the plaintiff's director, and he failed to establish a prima facie defence or credible grounds to set aside the default judgment; accordingly both the summons for further affidavits and the registrar's appeal were dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
Registrar's Appeal No 114 of 2015 dismissed; Summons No 2282 of 2015 (leave to adduce further affidavits) dismissed; application to set aside Default Judgment dismissed
Orders
- RA 114/2015 dismissed with costs to plaintiff
- SUM 2282/2015 for leave to adduce further affidavits dismissed
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