NAIL PALACE (BPP) PTE. LTD. v COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION OF SINGAPORE
Outcome
Appeal dismissedI dismiss the appeals in RAS 27 and RAS 28. The appellants are to comply with the terms of the learned DJ’s CNC Order and Publication Order for two years, except that the starting date of these orders is to run from the date of my decision.
Source: [2023] SGHC 203, High Court (General Division), decided 28 July 2023. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Goh Yihan |
| Charges / claim | Commercial Transactions |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Counsel | Adsan Law LLC, KSCGP Juris LLP, Setia Law LLC, Bethel Chan Ruiyi, Chooi Yue Wai Kenny, Joel Jaryn Yap Shen, Lam Yiting Joelle, Paul Aman Singh Sambhi, Singh Navinder |
Source: [2023] SGHC 203, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (9)
Case Significance
Nail Palace (BPP) Pte Ltd v Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore and another appeal [2023] SGHC 203 is a judgment of Goh Yihan J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 28 July 2023 in Registrar's Appeal (State Courts) Nos 27 and 28 of 2022. The appeals, brought by Nail Palace (BPP) Pte Ltd and Nail Palace (SM) Pte Ltd against the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore, arose from District Court Originating Summonses concerning section 9 of the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act (Cap 52A). The judgment addresses whether the defendants had engaged in unfair practices relating to fungal treatment packages, and the court's discretion under sections 9(1)(b) and 9(2) to grant final injunctions and under sections 9(1)(c) and 9(4) to grant accompanying orders.
[2023] SGHC 203 explained
NAIL PALACE (BPP) PTE. LTD. v COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION OF SINGAPORE ([2023] SGHC 203) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 28 July 2023. It is categorised under Commercial Transactions. 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 203 about?
NAIL PALACE (BPP) PTE. LTD. v COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION OF SINGAPORE ([2023] SGHC 203) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Commercial Transactions — Sale of services — Consumer protection —Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act — Whether defendants had engaged in unfair practices relating to fungal treatment packages”, “Commercial Transactions — Sale of services — Consumer protection —Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act — Sections 9(1)(b) and 9(2) — Relevant factors in the Court’s exercise of its discretion to grant final injunctions to restrain unfair practices”, and “Commercial Transactions — Sale of services — Consumer protection —Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act — Sections 9(1)(c) and 9(4) — Relevant factors in the Court’s exercise of its discretion to grant accompanying orders — Appropriate duration of the accompanying orders”, 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 203 consider?
The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50), Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act (Cap 52A), Import and Transit) Act (Cap 122A), and Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2023] SGHC 203 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGHC 111. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
Nail Palace (BPP) Pte Ltd and Nail Palace (SM) Pte Ltd, providers of manicure, pedicure and foot treatments, appealed against findings that they engaged in unfair practices relating to fungal treatment packages under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act. The appeals challenged declarations, injunctions and accompanying orders granted to the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore. The court dismissed both appeals, with the injunction and publication orders to run for two years from the date of its decision.
What was Nail Palace (BPP) v CCCS [2023] SGHC 203 about?
It was a consumer-protection appeal before Goh Yihan J, decided on 28 July 2023, in which Nail Palace (BPP) Pte Ltd and Nail Palace (SM) Pte Ltd appealed against the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore over alleged unfair practices relating to fungal treatment packages.
Which statutory provisions were at issue in [2023] SGHC 203?
The appeals concerned section 9 of the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act (Cap 52A), including the court's discretion under sections 9(1)(b) and 9(2) to grant final injunctions and under sections 9(1)(c) and 9(4) to grant accompanying orders and set their appropriate duration.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (14)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGHC 203)