[2002] SGHC 247

“Anor v Petrofac E&C Sdn Bhd [2020] 11 MLJ 141, on the Common Law Jurisprudence (both local and abroad) of Post-Trial Discovery; and Thyssen Hunnebeck Singapore Pte Ltd v TTJ Civil Engineering Pte Lid [2002] SGHC 247. The Defendant’s Contentions 15. The Defendant resisted the application on the principal ground that it”

“cific reference to ten financing facilities listed in Schedule 1 of the Application. In support, D2 relies on the Singapore case of Thyssen Humrebeck Singapore Pte Ltd v TTJ Civil Engineering Pte Ltd [2002] SGHC 247 (HC) (as referred to by our High Court in Ho King Min & Anor v Lee Meng Leng & Ors [2020] 1 LNS 1668 (HC”

“n that 25 the Plaintiff is a subsidiary of a public listed company. In support, a passage in the Singapore High Court case of Thyssen Hunnebeck 13 Singapore Pte Ltd v. TTJ Civil Engineering Pte Ltd [2002] SGHC 247 was cited: “6. In my view, I would hold that a “fishing expedition” in the context of discovery refers to”