Accent Delight v Bouvier: Forum Non Conveniens & Conflict of Laws
Accent Delight International Ltd and Xitrans Finance Ltd sued Yves Charles Edgar Bouvier, Mei Invest Limited, and Tania Rappo in the High Court of Singapore, alleging breach of fiduciary duties and fraudulent misrepresentation related to art acquisitions. The defendants sought a stay of proceedings based on lis alibi pendens and forum non conveniens, arguing Monaco or Switzerland were more appropriate forums. The court dismissed the summonses, finding Singapore to be the more appropriate forum and requiring the plaintiffs to discontinue their Monaco civil proceedings.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Summonses dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore court denies stay in Accent Delight v Bouvier, ruling Singapore is the appropriate forum despite parallel Monaco proceedings, citing the inapplicability of Swiss law to key claims.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xitrans Finance Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Summonses dismissed | Won | |
| Tania Rappo | Defendant | Individual | Summons dismissed | Lost | |
| Yves Charles Edgar Bouvier | Defendant | Individual | Summons dismissed | Lost | |
| MEI Invest Limited | Defendant | Corporation | Summons dismissed | Lost | |
| Accent Delight International Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Summonses dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lai Siu Chiu | Senior Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Accent and Xitrans sued Bouvier, Mei Invest, and Rappo, alleging breach of fiduciary duties and fraudulent misrepresentation.
- The plaintiffs claimed Bouvier acted as their agent in procuring 37 artworks and inflated the prices.
- The defendants sought a stay of proceedings, arguing Monaco or Switzerland were more appropriate forums.
- Parallel criminal and civil proceedings were ongoing in Monaco against Bouvier and Rappo.
- Bouvier is a permanent resident of Singapore and operates an art-related storage facility.
- Rybolovlev is a Russian oligarch and owns the plaintiff companies through family trusts.
- The plaintiffs were willing to discontinue their Monaco civil proceedings if the court ruled in their favor.
5. Formal Citations
- Accent Delight International Ltd and another v Bouvier, Yves Charles Edgar and others, Suit No 236 of 2015, [2016] SGHC 40
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Bouvier and Rybolovlev were first introduced by Rappo. | |
| Bouvier moved to Singapore. | |
| Rybolovlev took up residence in Monaco. | |
| Rybolovlev lodged a complaint with the Monaco General Prosecutor alleging fraud. | |
| The Prosecutor initiated a preliminary investigation against Bouvier. | |
| The Prosecutor requested the President of the Tribunal de Premiere in Monaco to designate an investigating judge. | |
| Bouvier was arrested by the Monaco police. | |
| The plaintiffs and Ekaterina applied to join the criminal proceedings as civil parties. | |
| Hutin-Blay lodged a criminal complaint in France. | |
| Plaintiffs filed writ for this Suit and applied for a worldwide Mareva injunction. | |
| Accent joined the French criminal proceedings as a civil party. | |
| Malbrancke requested Bouvier to disclose documents. | |
| Rappo's Monaco legal counsel filed an affidavit. | |
| The two defendants’ application to discharge the freezing order in Hong Kong was dismissed. | |
| Bouvier furnished separate undertakings to each of the plaintiffs. | |
| Summonses heard by the court. | |
| Summonses heard by the court. | |
| Summonses heard by the court. | |
| Plaintiffs filed Statement of Claim [Amendment No 1]. | |
| Bouvier filed his 14th affidavit for Summons 1763. | |
| Summonses heard by the court; parties filed submissions on the suitability of transferring this Suit to the SICC. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Forum Non Conveniens
- Outcome: The court held that Singapore was the more appropriate forum.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1987] 1 AC 460
- Lis Alibi Pendens
- Outcome: The court did not rule on the issue of lis alibi pendens because the plaintiffs agreed to discontinue their Monaco civil proceedings if the court ruled in their favor.
- Category: Procedural
- Applicability of Swiss Law
- Outcome: The court determined that Swiss law was not applicable to the majority of the plaintiffs' substantive claims.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
- Account of Profits
- Tracing
- Constructive Trust
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
- Fraudulent Misrepresentation
- Deceit
- Conspiracy to Injure
- Conspiracy to Defraud
- Dishonest Assistance
- Knowing Receipt
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Art
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bouvier, Yves Charles Edgar and another v Accent Delight International Ltd and another and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 558 | Singapore | Cited for the appellate court's decision to discharge the Mareva injunction and details of the parties’ relationships. |
| Accent Delight International Ltd and Anor v Yves Bouvier & Anor | N/A | Yes | [2015] HKCU 1367 | Hong Kong | Cited to show that the plaintiffs had also obtained an ex parte freezing order against the assets of the two defendants in Hong Kong. |
| Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1987] 1 AC 460 | England and Wales | Cited for the two-stage test for determining forum non conveniens. |
| Virsagi Management (S) Pte Ltd v Welltech Construction Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 1097 | Singapore | Cited regarding the doctrine of forum election and that the court should not focus on the reliefs sought because that is a procedural issue which differs depending on the fora. |
| Koh Kay Yew v Inno-Pacific Holdings Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1997] 2 SLR(R) 148 | Singapore | Cited regarding the doctrine of forum election. |
| Multi-Code Electronics Industries (M) Bhd and Another v Toh Chun Toh Gordon and Others | N/A | Yes | [2009] 1 SLR(R) 1000 | Singapore | Cited to support the argument that it would be oppressive and vexatious on the part of the plaintiffs to put him through unnecessary time, expense and effort to defend himself more than once on substantially the same matter in two different jurisdictions. |
| Yusen Air & Sea Service (S) Pte Ltd v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines | N/A | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR(R) 955 | Singapore | Cited to support the argument that once Bouvier had demonstrated a duplicity of actions in different jurisdictions (with the attendant risk of conflicting judgments as a result), the burden shifted to the plaintiffs to justify the continuance of concurrent proceedings by showing “very unusual circumstances”. |
| Rickshaw Investments Ltd v Nicolai Baron von Uexkull | N/A | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR(R) 377 | Singapore | Cited regarding savings of time and resources if the trial is held in the forum in which the witnesses reside and where they are clearly compellable to testify and the ultimate question is where the case may more suitably be tried in the interests of all the parties and of the ends of justice. |
| PT Hutan Domas Raya v Yue Xiu Enterprises (Holdings) Ltd and another | N/A | Yes | [2001] 1 SLR 104 | Singapore | Cited regarding the Spiliada test. |
| JIO Minerals FZC and others v Mineral Enterprises Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2011] 1 SLR 391 | Singapore | Cited regarding the Spiliada test and that the courts will generally consider the relevant connecting factors at stage one of the Spiliada test. |
| Ram Parshotam Mittal v Portcullis Trustnet (Singapore) Pte Ltd and Others | N/A | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1337 | Singapore | Cited regarding the Spiliada test and that the plaintiffs should be made to elect one jurisdiction as a matter of case management. |
| UBS AG v Telesto Investments Ltd and others and another matter | N/A | Yes | [2011] 4 SLR 503 | Singapore | Cited where the court adopted a similar approach regarding the place where the tort was committed. |
| CIMB Bank Bhd v Dresdner Kleinwort Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR 543 | Singapore | Cited regarding the location of witnesses is only really significant in relation to third party witnesses who are not in the employ of the party as it could give rise to issues of compellability. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| O 110 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act | Singapore |
| Code of Criminal Procedure of 5 July 1963 | Monaco |
| Code of Obligations of 30 March 1911 | Switzerland |
| Federal Act on Private International Law of 18 December 1987 | Switzerland |
| Civil Code of 10 December 1907 | Switzerland |
| Federal Code of Civil Procedure of 19 December 2008 | Switzerland |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Forum Non Conveniens
- Lis Alibi Pendens
- Mareva Injunction
- Agency
- Fiduciary Duty
- Artworks
- Inculpé
- Spiliada Test
- Singapore International Commercial Court
15.2 Keywords
- Forum Non Conveniens
- Conflict of Laws
- Art Market
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
- Singapore High Court
- Yves Bouvier
- Accent Delight
- Xitrans Finance
- Tania Rappo
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Conflict of Laws
- Forum Non Conveniens
- International Litigation
- Art Law
- Agency Law