Huttons Asia v Chen Qiming: Stay of Appeal Pending Payment of Costs

In Huttons Asia Pte Ltd v Chen Qiming, the Appellate Division of the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by Huttons Asia Pte Ltd and Ong Jianlong to stay an appeal (AD/CA 40/2024) by Chen Qiming pending the payment of costs awarded to Huttons in Suit 234 of 2022. The court, presided over by See Kee Oon JAD, allowed the application, citing Chen's evasion of payment and potential difficulties in enforcing the costs order overseas. The court ordered Chen to pay costs fixed at $8,000 inclusive of disbursements for the application.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Appellate Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application to stay the appeal allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The court granted a stay of appeal pending payment of costs, emphasizing the appellant's evasion of payment and potential enforcement difficulties.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Huttons Asia Pte LtdApplicant, RespondentCorporationApplication allowedWon
Ong JianlongApplicant, RespondentIndividualApplication allowedWon
Chen QimingRespondent, Appellant, PlaintiffIndividualAppeal stayedLost
Wu LishaDefendant, RespondentIndividualNeutralNeutral

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
See Kee OonJudge of the Appellate DivisionYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Lin Hui Yin SharonWithers KhattarWong LLP
Lim Chong HianWithers KhattarWong LLP
Clarence Lun YaodongFervent Chambers LLC

4. Facts

  1. Chen Qiming commenced Suit 234 against Huttons Asia Pte Ltd and Ong Jianlong.
  2. Suit 234 was dismissed by the Judge on 17 April 2024.
  3. The parties reached an agreement on 10 May 2024 for Chen Qiming to pay Huttons costs of $120,000.
  4. A consent order was granted by the Judge on 21 June 2024.
  5. Chen Qiming has not complied with the Costs Order.
  6. Huttons applied to stay AD 40 pending the payment of costs.
  7. FCL refused to accept service for an order for examination of judgment debtor against Mr Chen.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Huttons Asia Pte Ltd and another v Chen Qiming, , [2024] SGHC(A) 33
  2. , Civil Appeal No 40 of 2024, Civil Appeal No 40 of 2024
  3. , 234 of 2022, HC/S 234/2022

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Suit 234 commenced by Chen Qiming against Huttons Asia Pte Ltd.
Chen Qiming purchased a unit in Lloyd SixtyFive.
Suit 234 dismissed by the Judge.
Parties reached an agreement on costs of $120,000.
Consent order granted by the Judge.
WKW searched Mr Chen’s personal profile on ACRA Bizfile system.
WKW emailed FCL to ask if the latter had instructions to accept service of an order for examination of judgment debtor against the Mr Chen.
FCL responded, stating that they did not have instructions to accept service.
Parties’ written submissions dated.
Court allowed SUM 41.
FCL wrote in to court attempting to explain why they had no instructions to accept service for examination of judgment debtor proceedings.
Appellant’s Case was filed.
Record of Appeal was filed.
2nd Affidavit of Ong Jianlong dated.
1st Affidavit of Chen Qiming dated.
Huttons’ Written Submissions dated.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Stay of Appeal Pending Payment of Costs
    • Outcome: The court allowed the application to stay the appeal pending payment of costs.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2017] 4 SLR 789
      • [2020] 1 SLR 97
      • [2003] 2 SLR(R) 353

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Stay of Appeal

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation
  • Appellate Practice

11. Industries

  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Lim Poh Yeoh (alias Aster Lim) v TS Ong Construction Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2017] 4 SLR 789SingaporeCited to draw an analogy where the plaintiff failed to pay costs and the court held that there was no reason to believe that the plaintiff was unable to satisfy the other outstanding orders of court.
Independent State of Papua New Guinea v PNG Sustainable Development Program LtdCourt of AppealYes[2020] 1 SLR 97SingaporeCited for the principle that exceptional circumstances are required to justify a stay of proceedings and that the mere ability to pay costs is not sufficient.
Roberto Building Material Pte Ltd v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd and anotherN/AYes[2003] 2 SLR(R) 353SingaporeCited for the rationale that a right of appeal should not be curtailed by circumstances extraneous to the appeal.
The Republic of India v Deutsche Telekom AGCourt of AppealYes[2024] 1 SLR 56SingaporeCited to reflect the court’s more robust approach that now prevails in response to an appellant’s non-payment of the costs below.
Wee Soon Kim Anthony v Law Society of SingaporeN/AYes[2001] 2 SLR(R) 821SingaporeCited for the principle that the inherent powers of the court should be exercised only when it was just and equitable to do so and in particular to ensure the observance of the due process of law, to prevent improper vexation or oppression and to do justice between the parties

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Rules of Court 2021 O 21 r 2(6)
Rules of Court 2021 O 3 r 1(2)
Rules of Court 2021 O 3 r 2(2)
Rules of Court 2021 O 15 r 19
Singapore International Commercial Court Rules 2021 O 22 r 2(2)(f)
Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) O 92 r 4

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Companies Act 1967Singapore
Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Stay of proceedings
  • Costs order
  • Consent order
  • Examination of judgment debtor
  • Evasion of payment

15.2 Keywords

  • Stay of appeal
  • Payment of costs
  • Civil procedure
  • Singapore
  • Huttons Asia
  • Chen Qiming

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Appellate Practice85
Civil Practice75
Litigation65
Jurisdiction50

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Appeals
  • Costs