Sherridon Exim v India International Insurance: Marine Insurance Claim Dispute

Sherridon Exim Pte Ltd sued India International Insurance Pte Ltd in the High Court of Singapore on 15 May 2001, claiming damages for breaches of an agreement related to an All Risks marine cargo policy. The dispute arose from the theft of electronic goods shipped from Singapore to Israel. Sherridon Exim claimed that India International Insurance wrongfully repudiated liability under the policy. India International Insurance counterclaimed for sums advanced to Sherridon Exim. The court dismissed both the plaintiff's claim and the defendant's counterclaim.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Plaintiffs claims and the defendants counterclaim in this action are all dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Marine insurance claim dispute over stolen electronic goods. The court dismissed both the plaintiff's claim and the defendant's counterclaim.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
India International Insurance Pte LtdDefendantCorporationCounterclaim DismissedLost
Sherridon Exim Pte LtdPlaintiffCorporationClaim DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Kew ChaiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Anna QuahAng & Partners
Belinda Ang Fong Saw EanAng & Partners
Navinder SinghJoseph Tan Jude Benny Anne Choo
Katherine TeoJoseph Tan Jude Benny Anne Choo

4. Facts

  1. Goods were shipped from Singapore to Eilat (Israel) on 15 December 1990.
  2. The goods were stolen on 3 January 1991 after arriving in Ashdod (Israel).
  3. The plaintiffs claimed against the defendants as underwriters for loss of the goods due to theft.
  4. The defendants initially took the position that it was a confiscation and was therefore not covered under the policy.
  5. The parties entered into an agreement on 15 December 1992 regarding the advance payment of the insured amount.
  6. The plaintiffs repaid the sum of US$661,870.00 to the defendants on 15 January 1996.
  7. The plaintiffs commenced an action on 6 March 1996 under the All Risks marine cargo policy.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Sherridon Exim Pte Ltd v India International Insurance Pte Ltd, Suit 316/1998, [2001] SGHC 93

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Goods shipped from Singapore to Eilat (Israel)
Goods arrived in Ashdod (Israel)
Goods removed using a photocopied bill of lading and false gate pass
Plaintiffs signed the letter of indemnity
Agreement signed between parties
Verdict in the criminal proceedings against Avi Cohen was given
Haifa District Court dismissed the plaintiffs claims against the Israeli customs authority
Defendants demanded from the plaintiffs the return of the sum of US$661,870.00
Defendants pressed for payment by a reminder
Plaintiffs returned the said sum
Defendants demanded that the plaintiffs pay them interest
Plaintiffs commenced this action under the All Risks marine cargo policy
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiffs claims under the Agreement are not maintainable.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Time Bar
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiffs claims were time-barred.
    • Category: Procedural
  3. Fraudulent Misrepresentation
    • Outcome: The court found that the plaintiffs were innocent of any complicity in the smuggling.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages for breach of contract
  2. Return of US$661,870.00
  3. Return of US$88,676.79

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Unjust Enrichment
  • Money Had and Received

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Insurance Law

11. Industries

  • Insurance
  • Shipping
  • Electronics

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Yogambikai Nagarajah v Indian Overseas BankHigh CourtYes[1997] 1 SLR 258SingaporeCited regarding the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard of proof.
Sumitomo Bank Ltd v Kartika Ratna ThahirHigh CourtYes[1993] 1 SLR 735SingaporeCited regarding the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard of proof.
Ong & Co Pte Ltd v Quah Kay TeeHigh CourtYes[1996] 2 SLR 553SingaporeCited regarding the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard of proof.
Evans v BartlamN/AYes[1937] All England Law Reports Annotated p.646England and WalesCited regarding the doctrine of approbation and reprobation.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • All Risks marine cargo policy
  • Letter of indemnity
  • Repudiation
  • Smuggling
  • Time bar
  • Agreement
  • Israeli Customs Ordinance

15.2 Keywords

  • marine insurance
  • theft
  • smuggling
  • contract
  • repudiation
  • time bar

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Marine Insurance80
Insurance Law75
Shipping Law25
Contract Law20

16. Subjects

  • Marine Insurance
  • Contract Law
  • Commercial Dispute