Pearlson Enterprises Ltd v Hong Leong Co Ltd (No 2)

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Court: Federal Court (Singapore)
• Judge: M Buttrose J
• Judgment Date: 03 November 1967
• Neutral Citation: [1967] SGFC 21
• Citation: [1967] SGFC 21
• Date: 03 November 1967
• Subject Matter: Whether order of appellate court could be amended under slip rule,Orders,Order XXIX r 11 Rules of the Supreme Court 1934,Order of appellate court silent on successful partyÂ’s entitlement to refund of taxed costs paid,Slip rule,Civil Procedure,Amendments
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Plaintiff Counsel: KA O’Connor
• Docket Number: Civil Appeal No Y38 of 1966
• Defendant Counsel: Ho Kian Ping

The formal order of the Federal Court dated 7 August 1967 allowing the appeal of the defendants (judgment reported in [1965-1968] SLR 32 ) was silent on the question of the successful appellants` entitlement to a refund of the taxed costs paid by the appellants to the respondents in the court below. The respondents having declined to repay these costs, the appellants applied by motion to amend the said formal order of the Federal Court by inserting an additional clause in the order requiring that the respondents should repay the costs paid in the court below. The appellants relied on O XXIX r 11, commonly known as the slip rule. The respondents opposed the motion, contending, inter alia,that the order expressed the intention of the court, that there had accordingly been no slip or omission and that the appellants` only remedy was to commence fresh proceedings for recovery of the costs paid in the court below. They also contended that some of the costs had been paid in respect of part of the claim...