Ho Yew Weng Alan James v Poh Eng Wah Mark t/a SG Vehicles Trading

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Lim Teong Qwee JC
• Judgment Date: 04 July 1997
• Neutral Citation: [1997] SGHC 179
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Year: 1997
• Published date: 13 February 2013
• Plaintiff Counsel: Andrew Ee Chong Nam
• Defendant Counsel: Lynette Leong
• Citation: [1997] SGHC 179

Judgment:

GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT

1. On 28 June 1996 a district judge dismissed the appeal of the defendant from the decision of a deputy registrar of the subordinate courts who had ordered that judgment be entered for the plaintiff for damages which she assessed at $48,032.46 and $7,000 costs. The defendant appealed from the decision of the district judge. I allowed the appeal. I set aside the registrar’s certificate as to the damages assessed and the final judgment entered on 25 April 1996 and I gave certain directions as to the assessment of damages.

2. The action was commenced by writ issued on 14 October 1993. The statement of claim runs into 24 paras and I will only summarise the material allegations in it. It alleges that by a guarantee dated 22 May 1990 the defendant guaranteed the due payment and performance by the hirer of all sums due and all obligations under a hire purchase agreement also dated 22 May 1990 relating to a motorcar and that in breach of the agreement the hirer a company incorporated in Singapore had failed to pay certain monthly sums and the owner had repossessed the motorcar on 29 June 1992. It goes on to allege that the owner had assigned to the plaintiff all its rights and interest under the hire purchase agreement and the plaintiff had sold the motorcar on 21 July 1993 and suffered loss and expense. It gives particulars of the loss and expense and alleges demands made on the hirer and the defendant for payment and that the hirer had defaulted in payment and was in compulsory liquidation. The plaintiff claimed a liquidated sum against the defendant.

3. On 16 June 1994 judgment in default of appearance was entered against the defendant for $44,046.56 and $5,975.97 for interest as at 21 May 1993 and $8,493.14 for further interest to the date of judgment and costs on a solicitor and client basis. The judgment has not been paid.

4. On 30 August 1995 the defendant applied by summons for an order that the default judgment be set aside and for certain other orders. On 15 September 1995 a deputy registrar of the subordinate courts made an order that:

"The default judgment entered against the Defendant herein on the 16th June 1995 be set aside and an Interlocutory Judgment be substituted therefor and be entered against the Defendant with damages to be assessed and costs reserve (sic) to the Registrar."

There was no appeal from this order and the interlocutory judgment (which I shall refer to as the "interlocutory judgment") has not been set aside. The order of court has not even been amended. The default judgment referred to was entered in 1994 and not 1995 but nothing arises from this error.

5. The parties then proceeded with the assessment of damages pursuant to the interlocutory judgment. Affidavits were filed and oral evidence was presented and submissions were made on behalf of both the plaintiff and the defendant and on 25 April 1996 a deputy registrar assessed the damages at $48,032.46. A certificate was issued and final judgment was entered accordingly. The defendant’s appeal to the district judge from whose decision the appeal came before me was an appeal from the deputy registrar’s decision ordering that final judgment be entered.

6. As stated above I allowed the appeal. The formal order filed on 7 March 1997 does not express correctly the orders I made. At the end of the hearing:

(a) I ordered the judgment dated 15 September 1995 to stand;

(b) I set aside the judgment and registrar’s certificate dated 25 April 1996; and

(c) I directed the registrar to assess damages pursuant to the judgment dated 15 September 1995 on the basis that the breach occurred at the end of July 1992 and to allow for the value of the motorcar at that date.

I also ordered the plaintiff to pay costs which I fixed at $1,500.

7. The defendant was apparently not satisfied with these orders. He has given notice of appeal against what he has referred to as the following parts of my decision:

(a)...