Judgment Header
SK Shipping Co Ltd v IOF Pte Ltd [2012] SGHCR 14
Court DecisionSGHCR
[2012] SGHCR 14
[2012] SGHCR 14
High Court of Singapore25 Sept 2012Suit No 440 of 2012 (Summons No 3808 of 2012)
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 3 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
3Later cases and laws citing this decision
“rlying the NTP procedure was that the requesting party should be conferred the same advantage as if the documents referred to had been fully set out in the pleadings: SK Shipping Co Ltd v IOF Pte Ltd [2012] SGHCR 14 (“SK Shipping”) at [16].”
“ith a third party, the duty extends to making reasonable efforts to request for the relevant documents: Saxo Bank A/S v Innopac Holdings Ltd [2022] 3 SLR 964 at [63]; SK Shipping Co Ltd v IOF Pte Ltd [2012] SGHCR 14 at [38]; Hai Jiao 1306 Ltd and others v Yaw Chee Siew [2020] 3 SLR 142 (“Hai Jiao”) at [47]; Phones 4U (”
“In Interactive Digital Finance, Chua J observed at [34] (citing SK Shipping Co Ltd v IOF Pte Ltd [2012] SGHCR 14 (“SK Shipping”) at [17], which referred to Quilter at 51) that a party referring to a document in its pleadings must show “good cause” to oppose the production of the document. He found that it was n”
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: Suit No 440 of 2012 (Summons No 3808 of 2012)
Case Metadata
Court: High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2012-09-25
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Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.