RIVIERA CO., LTD. v TOSHIO MASUI
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Philip Jeyaretnam |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure |
| Counsel | Oon & Bazul LLP, TSMP Law Corporation, Daren Kim Chang Jin, Eoon Zizhen, Benedict (Wen Zizhen), Goh Enchi, Jeanne, Tan May Lian Felicia |
Source: [2023] SGHC 223, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Riviera Co, Ltd v Toshio Masui [2023] SGHC 223 is a grounds of decision of Philip Jeyaretnam J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 16 August 2023 in Suit No 572 of 2021 (Summons No 669 of 2023). The plaintiff, Riviera Co, Ltd, a Japanese company that succeeded to the rights and obligations of Aoi Corporation by an absorption merger on 1 April 2021, had already defeated the pleaded defences of the defendant, Japanese national Toshio Masui, through a trial on preliminary issues and a striking out application. Philip Jeyaretnam J dismissed the defendant's application to amend his defence to introduce a new defence, finding it unsustainable and largely a paraphrasing of the struck out defence.
Summary
Riviera Co, Ltd, a Japanese company, brought an action against Toshio Masui to enforce a final monetary judgment of the Tokyo District Court arising from a 2015 loan agreement. After the plaintiff defeated Masui's pleaded defences through a trial on preliminary issues and a striking out, Masui applied to amend his defence to introduce a new defence. Philip Jeyaretnam J found the proposed amendment unsustainable and largely a paraphrase of the struck out defence, and dismissed the application to amend before entering judgment.
What was Riviera Co, Ltd v Toshio Masui [2023] SGHC 223 about?
It was an application by the defendant Toshio Masui before Philip Jeyaretnam J to amend his defence to introduce a new defence in Suit No 572 of 2021. The court dismissed the application on 16 August 2023, and the defendant appealed.
Why was the amendment refused in [2023] SGHC 223?
Philip Jeyaretnam J found the proposed amendment unsustainable and largely a paraphrasing of a defence already struck out, after Riviera Co, Ltd had defeated the defendant's pleaded defences through a trial on preliminary issues and a striking out application.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (3)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments on the same subject, most closely matched first.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGHC 223)