[2008] SGCA 38

“ay from the strict approach in The Saudi Eagle, which it initially followed. This shift is evident in the decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal in Mercurine Pte Ltd v Canberra Development Pte Ltd [2008] SGCA 38 (CA), where the Court observed: “It is, in our view, rather illogical to hold that the test for setting a”

“ay from the strict approach in The Saudi Eagle, which it initially followed. This shift is evident in the decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal in Mercurine Pte Ltd v Canberra Development Pte Ltd [2008] SGCA 38 (CA), where the Court observed: “It is, in our view, rather illogical to hold that the test for setting a”

“[2008] SGCA 38 [2008] 4 SLR 907 where the court had determined the suitable legal tests to be used when determining whether to set aside a JID or otherwise. It was held: “[10] VK Rajah JA writing for the Singapore’”

“I found that the defendant raised triable issues, and that the thresholds for setting aside a regular default judgment, as pronounced in Mercurine Pte Ltd v Canberra Development Ltd [2008] SGCA 38 (“Mercurine”), were clearly crossed. With no written agreement between the parties, and all available documentary evidence”