CHAN PIK SUN v WAN HOE KEET (WEN HAOJIE) & 3 Ors

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 36 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) 36 High Court (Appellate Division) 17 November 2023 AD/OA 46/2023 16 min read

3 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	17 November 2023
Judges	Kannan Ramesh, Woo Bih Li
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Counsel	Advocatus Law LLP, LVM Law Chambers LLC, Christopher Anand s/o Daniel, Clara Lim Ai Ying, Harjean Kaur, Lee Sien Liang Joseph, Lim Yi Zheng, Lok Vi Ming, Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan, Saadhvika Jayanth, Yeo Yi Ling Eileen

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 36, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 17 November 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Costs — Whether the lower court ordered costs to be fixed or assessed for the purpose of starting the time for filing of an appeal Civil Procedure — Appeals — Leave — Whether applicant must have satisfied the usual grounds for obtaining permission to appeal on costs when such appeal may be heard together with the appeal on the merits of the claims

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (2)

Kannan Ramesh Coram Woo Bih Li Delivered

Counsel (11)

Advocatus Law LLP Firm LVM Law Chambers LLC Firm Christopher Anand s/o Daniel Counsel Respondent Clara Lim Ai Ying Counsel Applicant Harjean Kaur Counsel Respondent Lee Sien Liang Joseph Counsel Applicant Lim Yi Zheng Counsel Respondent Lok Vi Ming Counsel Applicant Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan Counsel Applicant Saadhvika Jayanth Counsel Respondent Yeo Yi Ling Eileen Counsel Respondent

Parties (5)

Strategic Wealth Consultancy Pte Ltd Respondent Chan Pik Sun Applicant Ho Hao Tian Sebastian Respondent Ho Sally Respondent Wan Hoe Keet (Wen Haojie) Respondent

Case Significance

Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet (Wen Haojie) and others [2023] SGHC(A) 36 is a decision of the Appellate Division of the High Court, delivered by Woo Bih Li JAD (sitting with Kannan Ramesh JAD) on 17 November 2023 in Originating Application No 46 of 2023. The application sought permission to appeal against the High Court judge's costs decision in Suit No 806 of 2018, where the respondents were awarded costs and disbursements totalling $374,365.22, including an agreed sum of $59,040.41 that was not challenged. The judgment addressed whether costs had been ordered fixed or assessed for the purpose of starting time to appeal, and the grounds required for permission to appeal on costs.

[2023] SGHC(A) 36 explained

CHAN PIK SUN v WAN HOE KEET (WEN HAOJIE) & 3 Ors ([2023] SGHC(A) 36) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 17 November 2023. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, 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] SGHC(A) 36 about?

CHAN PIK SUN v WAN HOE KEET (WEN HAOJIE) & 3 Ors ([2023] SGHC(A) 36) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Costs — Whether the lower court ordered costs to be fixed or assessed for the purpose of starting the time for filing of an appeal” and “Civil Procedure — Appeals — Leave — Whether applicant must have satisfied the usual grounds for obtaining permission to appeal on costs when such appeal may be heard together with the appeal on the merits of the claims”, 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) 36 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.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2023] SGHC(A) 36 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGHC 96. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2023] SGHC(A) 36?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGHC(A) 36 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. 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.

What did Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet [2023] SGHC(A) 36 decide?

The Appellate Division, through Woo Bih Li JAD, addressed a permission-to-appeal application over costs in Suit 806 of 2018, where respondents were awarded $374,365.22 in costs and disbursements, including an agreed $59,040.41, examining when time to appeal on costs begins to run.

How much in costs was awarded in the underlying Suit 806 of 2018 ([2023] SGHC(A) 36)?

The High Court judge awarded the respondents costs and disbursements totalling $374,365.22, which included an agreed sum of $59,040.41 that the applicant, Ms Chan Pik Sun, did not intend to appeal, as recorded in the Appellate Division's judgment [2023] SGHC(A) 36.