REX LAM PAKI v PNG SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM LIMITED

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 24 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] SGHC(A) 24 High Court (Appellate Division) 4 July 2023 AD/CA 123/2021 17 min read

8 cases cited

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

We accordingly dismissed the appeal with costs fixed at $35,000 (inclusive of disbursements).

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 24, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 4 July 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	4 July 2023
Judges	Andre Maniam, Kannan Ramesh
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Sentence / award	$35,000
Counsel	Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP, Premier Law LLC, Abel George, Alexander Choo Wei Wen, Boey Swee Siang, Mark Jerome Seah Wei Hsien, Philip Teh Ahn Ren, See Kwang Guan (Martin), Suchitra Suresh Kumar

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 24, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 4 July 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Delay Civil Procedure — Judgments and orders Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction — Inherent

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (2)

Andre Maniam Delivered Kannan Ramesh Coram

Counsel (9)

Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP Firm Premier Law LLC Firm Abel George Counsel Appellant Alexander Choo Wei Wen Counsel Respondent Boey Swee Siang Counsel Appellant Mark Jerome Seah Wei Hsien Counsel Respondent Philip Teh Ahn Ren Counsel Respondent See Kwang Guan (Martin) Counsel Respondent Suchitra Suresh Kumar Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

PNG Sustainable Development Program Limited Respondent Rex Lam Paki Appellant

Case Significance

Rex Lam Paki v PNG Sustainable Development Program Ltd [2023] SGHC(A) 24 is a grounds of decision of the Appellate Division of the High Court, delivered on 4 July 2023 in Civil Appeal No 123 of 2021, with Andre Maniam J delivering the judgment of the court sitting with Kannan Ramesh JAD. The appellant, a former director of the respondent company, had applied to set aside a judgment entered against him on admissions of fact after the respondent sued him in 2018 for breaches of fiduciary duties. The court dismissed the appeal with costs to the respondent: while it agreed the court did have the inherent power to set aside a judgment on admissions, it agreed with the Judge below (whose grounds are reported at PNG Sustainable Development Program Ltd v Rex Lam Paki and others [2022] SGHC 188) that setting aside was not warranted in this case.

[2023] SGHC(A) 24 explained

REX LAM PAKI v PNG SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM LIMITED ([2023] SGHC(A) 24) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 4 July 2023. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. 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] SGHC(A) 24 about?

REX LAM PAKI v PNG SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM LIMITED ([2023] SGHC(A) 24) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Delay”, “Civil Procedure — Judgments and orders”, and “Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction — Inherent”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 24 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.

Summary

The appellant, a former director sued by the respondent company for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties, applied to set aside a judgment entered against him on admissions of fact after he failed to file a defence. The judge below held the court had no power to set aside such a judgment and, in any event, would not do so. The court held that the court did have an inherent power to set aside a judgment on admissions, but agreed setting aside was unwarranted given the appellant's lack of good reason for his defaults and lengthy delay, and dismissed the appeal with costs of $35,000.

What was Rex Lam Paki v PNG Sustainable Development Program Ltd [2023] SGHC(A) 24 about?

It was an Appellate Division appeal decided on 4 July 2023, with Andre Maniam J delivering the judgment, by a former director seeking to set aside a judgment entered against him on admissions of fact after the respondent company sued him in 2018 for breaches of fiduciary duties.

How did the court decide the appeal in [2023] SGHC(A) 24?

The court dismissed the appeal with costs to the respondent, agreeing that the court did have the inherent power to set aside a judgment on admissions but agreeing with the Judge below (reported at [2022] SGHC 188) that setting aside was not warranted here.