COD v COE

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 29 consider?

The judgment refers to Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGCA 29 Court of Appeal 27 September 2023 CA/CA 32/2022 ( CA/SUM 22/2022 ) 29 min read

10 cases cited (8 SG, 2 foreign) Cited by 5 cases

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	27 September 2023
Judges	Belinda Ang Saw Ean, Judith Prakash, Steven Chong
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure, Arbitration
Counsel	Haridass Ho & Partners, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, Amos Julian Sivasupramaniam, Chan Leng Sun, Kwek Choon Lin Winston, Lee Yong Yee, Lim Zhi Ming Max, Rachel Low, Tan Boon Yong Thomas

Source: [2023] SGCA 29, Court of Appeal, decided 27 September 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure - Appeals - Fresh Evidence Arbitration - Award - Recourse against award - Setting aside - Natural justice

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Arbitration

Judges (3)

Belinda Ang Saw Ean Delivered Judith Prakash Coram Steven Chong Coram

Counsel (9)

Haridass Ho & Partners Firm Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP Firm Amos Julian Sivasupramaniam Counsel Respondent Chan Leng Sun Counsel Applicant Kwek Choon Lin Winston Counsel Applicant Lee Yong Yee Counsel Respondent Lim Zhi Ming Max Counsel Applicant Rachel Low Counsel Applicant Tan Boon Yong Thomas Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

COD Appellant COE Respondent

Case Significance

COD v COE [2023] SGCA 29 is a grounds of decision of the Court of Appeal, delivered on 27 September 2023 in Civil Appeal No 32 of 2022 (Summons No 22 of 2022), arising from Originating Summons No 925 of 2021. Judith Prakash JCA, Steven Chong JCA and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA sat, with Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA delivering the grounds of decision. In SUM 22 the appellant COD sought leave to adduce further evidence on the purported market value of two cranes that were the subject of an underlying arbitration, in support of its appeal to set aside the tribunal's final award. The court dismissed both SUM 22 and CA 32 on 26 June 2023, affirming the Judge's refusal to set aside the award, and issued written grounds only for the dismissal of SUM 22.

[2023] SGCA 29 explained

COD v COE ([2023] SGCA 29) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 27 September 2023. It is categorised under Civil Procedure and Arbitration. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 5 other reported Singapore judgments, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGCA 29 about?

COD v COE ([2023] SGCA 29) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure - Appeals - Fresh Evidence” and “Arbitration - Award - Recourse against award - Setting aside - Natural justice”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 29 consider?

The judgment refers to Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

How influential is [2023] SGCA 29?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGCA 29 has been cited by 5 later reported Singapore judgments. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

Summary

COD applied for liberty to adduce further evidence, concerning the market value of two cranes, at the hearing of its appeal seeking to set aside an arbitral award, on the ground of an alleged breach of natural justice. The appellant sought to use the new evidence to raise fresh arguments not put before the judge below. The Court of Appeal held that the evidence failed the materiality requirement of the modified Ladd v Marshall test, and dismissed both the application to adduce further evidence and the underlying appeal.

What was COD v COE [2023] SGCA 29 about?

It was a Court of Appeal decision delivered on 27 September 2023 before Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA, Judith Prakash JCA and Steven Chong JCA, concerning an application by COD to adduce fresh evidence on the value of two cranes in an arbitration appeal.

How did the court rule in [2023] SGCA 29?

The court dismissed both the appeal (CA 32) and the summons (SUM 22) on 26 June 2023, affirming the Judge's refusal to set aside the arbitral award, and issued written grounds only for dismissing the fresh-evidence application, SUM 22.