Perwira Affin Bank Berhad (formerly known as Perwira Habib Bank Malaysia Berhad) v Lee Hai Pey and another

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judgment Date: 21 May 2007
• Date: 21 May 2007
• Docket Number: Originating Summons No 1054 of
• Court: High Court (Singapore)

Perwira Affin Bank Berhad (formerly known as Perwira Habib Bank Malaysia Berhad)

Plaintiff

and

Lee Hai Pey and another

Defendant

[2007] SGHC 76

Judith Prakash J

Originating Summons No 1054 of 1996 (Registrar's Appeal No 600008 of 2006)

High Court

Civil Procedure–Foreign judgments–Reciprocal enforcement–Judgment obtained in Malaysia–Registration in Singapore–Application for registration order to be perfected–Whether just and convenient to allow foreign judgment to be enforced in local courts–Section 3 (1) Reciprocal Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgments Act (Cap 264, 1985 Rev Ed)

The plaintiff (“the Bank”) commenced an action in the High Court of Malaya against the second defendant (“Mr Tham”), who had acted as guarantor of a loan extended by the Bank, and applied for summary judgment. The Bank was successful and judgment was entered against Mr Tham (“the Malaysian judgment”). The Bank had been trying to enforce the Malaysian judgment for nearly 20 years by applying to register the judgment in Singapore. However, Mr Tham had been successful in setting aside the registration orders.

When the Bank procured the third registration of the Malaysian judgment, Mr Tham applied for the registration order to be set aside but his application was dismissed by the assistant registrar. Mr Tham appealed to the judge in chambers (“the judge”). The judge allowed Mr Tham's appeal in part and ordered a stay of proceedings on the third registration order. At that time, Mr Tham had applied to set aside the Malaysian court order granting leave for the enforcement of the Malaysian judgment. The application was dismissed by the senior assistant registrar in Malaysia. Mr Tham filed an appeal against the dismissal and the appeal was pending at the time of his application to set aside the third registration order in Singapore.

Later, Mr Tham's appeal against the Malaysian decision granting leave to enforce the judgment was dismissed and the Bank came back to court and applied for the third registration order to be perfected in Singapore. Mr Tham contested the application but the assistant registrar found that the Bank's application should be granted. Mr Tham appealed again.

The arguments in the present appeal centred around exactly what the judge had done when he had partially allowed Mr Tham's appeal and whether it was just and convenient to allow the Malaysian judgment to be enforced. The Bank's case in brief, which was endorsed by the assistant registrar, was that the judge had simply been against the Bank enforcing its judgment immediately because of the existence of the pending appeal in Malaysia. The judge thus granted a stay pending the outcome of the Malaysian appeal but had not set aside the registration of the Malaysian judgment.

On its part, Mr Tham submitted that: (a) the judge's decision was not a dismissal of his application to set aside the registration of the Malaysian judgment; and (b) the court in determining whether the registration was to be set aside was entitled to look at the enforceability of the Malaysian judgment based on its validity in Malaysia as of the present date. It was Mr Tham's submission that the Malaysian judgment was no longer enforceable or executable in Malaysia.

Held, dismissing the appeal:

(1) Mr Tham's second argument was not considered because he failed on the first. The judge had upheld the assistant registrar's decision to dismiss the application to set aside the third registration order. If the third registration order had been set aside by reason of the judge's decision to set aside the assistant registrar's dismissal of Mr Tham's application, then there would have been no proceedings to stay. The reason for the stay must be that the registration order was effective but, because the judge was not sure what the outcome of the Malaysian applications would be, the judge regarded it as not being just and convenient to allow further...