REX LAM PAKI v PNG SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM LIMITED

[2023] SGHC(A) 24 High Court (Appellate Division) 4 July 2023 AD/CA 123/2021

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 for the appellant Alexander Choo Wei Wen Counsel for the respondent

Boey Swee Siang Counsel for the appellant

Mark Jerome Seah Wei Hsien Counsel for the respondent

Philip Teh Ahn Ren Counsel for the respondent

See Kwang Guan (Martin) Counsel for the respondent

Suchitra Suresh Kumar Counsel for the 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.

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.