Judgment Header
Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174
Court DecisionSGHC
[2010] SGHC 174
[2010] SGHC 174
General Division of the High Court of Singapore10 Jun 2010Originating Summons No 19 of 2010
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 14 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
14Later cases and laws citing this decision
“reditor is a foreign company, making it inconvenient or expensive to seek recovery outside jurisdiction, is not a special circumstance warranting a stay: Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 at [13]; Denis Matthew Harte v Tan Hun Hoe and Another [2001] SGHC 19 at [64]. The defendants alleged th”
“rading as Ban Hon Trading Enterprise) [1991] 2 SLR(R) 869 at [5]; Lian Soon Construction Pte Ltd v Guan Qian Realty Pte Ltd [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1053 at [14]; Strandore Invest A/S and Others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore Invest”) at [7]. The “special circumstances” include where it may be impossible to reverse t”
“, by failing to respond to the Draft Judgment, Sumatec was deemed to have consented to its terms under O 42 r 8(2) of the Rules. Ebony Ritz further cites Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 for the proposition that an appellant must show special circumstances before a Court will grant a stay.”
“cable to an application for a stay of execution were stated in Lian Soon Construction Pte Ltd v Guan Qian Realty Pte Ltd [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1053 as cited in Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore”) at [7]:”
“eprive a successful party of the fruits of its litigation until an appeal is determined, unless the unsuccessful party can show special circumstances to justify it (Strandore Invest A/S v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 at [7]).”
Show 9 moreShow fewer
“The legal principles governing a stay of execution pending appeal have been pithily summarised by Justice Quentin Loh in Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore Invest”) at [7], referencing the Court of Appeal’s decision in Lian Soon Construction Pte Ltd v Guan Qian Realty Pte Ltd [199”
“by itself a reason for granting a stay (see the High Court decision of Lee Kuan Yew v Jeyaretnam Joshua Benjamin [1990] 1 SLR(R) 772 and Denis, cited by Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore”) at [10]). The reason for this is that the special circumstances which merit the grant of a”
“by Vivian Ramsey IJ in CPIT Investments Ltd v Qilin World Capital Ltd and another [2017] 5 SLR 148 as the principles applicable in a case in the SICC. In Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore”) at [7], Quentin Loh J summarised the approach to a stay of enforcement pending an appeal:”
“Moreover, the principles governing a stay of execution pending appeal mirror the stated principles governing a grant of an Erinford injunction. In Strandore Invest AS v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore”), Quentin Loh J, citing the decision of the Court of Appeal in Lian Soon Construction Pte Ltd v Guan Qian Real”
“A further point raised by the Claimant is that the Impeachment Application is, in any event, devoid of merit. In Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 at [10], Quentin Loh J (as he then was) observed that:”
“ning Pte Ltd [2024] SGHC 47 (“Axis”) at [8]–[9]). The fact that there is little merit to the appeal is also a relevant circumstance the court can take into account (Strandore Invest A/S v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 at [10]). Ultimately, the court’s task when considering such a stay application is to hold the balance b”
“e Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) (see FJR, Table of Derivations). The principles concerning a stay of execution pending appeal are set out in Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore”) at [7] and [10], and I summarise them as follows:”
“agreed on the legal principles applicable to an application for a stay of execution pending appeal. These principles were summarised by the High Court in Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174 (“Strandore”) (at [7]) as follows:”
“s a discretion to grant a stay of execution pending appeal. In deciding whether to exercise its discretion, the court considers the following principles (Strandore Invest A/S and others v Soh Kim Wat [2010] SGHC 174, at [7]):”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: Originating Summons No 19 of 2010
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2010-06-10
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.