Tsudakoma Corp. v Global Trade Well Pte Ltd

[2023] SGHC 26 High Court (General Division) 3 February 2023 HC/OC 135/2022 ( HC/RA 340/2022 )

1 cases cited

Outcome

Appeal allowed

“I allow the appeal and grant a stay of the Singapore proceedings.”

Source: [2023] SGHC 26, High Court (General Division), decided 3 February 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	3 February 2023
Judge	Choo Han Teck
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure, Conflict Of Laws
Outcome	Appeal allowed
Counsel	Joyce A. Tan & Partners LLC, Oon & Bazul LLP, Esther Yong, Levin Lin Lok Yan, Lim Ying Sin Daniel, Prakaash s/o Paniar Silvam

Source: [2023] SGHC 26, High Court (General Division), decided 3 February 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Stay of proceedings Conflict Of Laws — Choice of jurisdiction — Exclusive

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Conflict Of Laws

Judges (1)

Choo Han Teck Delivered

Counsel (6)

Joyce A. Tan & Partners LLC Firm Oon & Bazul LLP Firm Esther Yong Counsel for the defendant

Levin Lin Lok Yan Counsel for the defendant

Lim Ying Sin Daniel Counsel for the claimant Prakaash s/o Paniar Silvam Counsel for the defendant

Parties (2)

Global Trade Well Pte Ltd Defendant

Tsudakoma Corp Claimant

Case Significance

Tsudakoma Corp v Global Trade Well Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 26 is a judgment of the General Division of the High Court, with judgment reserved by Choo Han Teck J and delivered on 3 February 2023 in Originating Claim No 135 of 2022 (Registrar's Appeal No 340 of 2022). The appeal challenged an order dismissing an application in HC/SUM 3436/2022 for a stay of proceedings in Singapore. The appellant, Global Trade Well Pte Ltd, a Singapore-incorporated international commodity trading company and defendant, sought the stay against the respondent claimant Tsudakoma Corp, a Japanese textile machine manufacturer. The dispute concerned Memoranda of Understanding signed in 2017 and 2018 appointing Global Trade Well as a dealer for Tsudakoma's products, and raised issues of stay of proceedings and exclusive choice of jurisdiction.

Summary

Global Trade Well Pte Ltd, a Singapore commodity trader appointed as dealer for Japanese textile machine manufacturer Tsudakoma Corp, appealed against the refusal of its application to stay Singapore proceedings, relying on a clause in the parties' Memorandum of Understanding said to confer exclusive jurisdiction on Japan. The court rejected Tsudakoma's argument that seeking the stay was an abuse of process and held that Tsudakoma had not shown strong cause to refuse a stay. The appeal was allowed and the Singapore proceedings stayed.

What did Tsudakoma Corp v Global Trade Well [2023] SGHC 26 concern?

Decided by Choo Han Teck J on 3 February 2023, it was an appeal against dismissal of an application in HC/SUM 3436/2022 for a stay of Singapore proceedings, raising issues of stay of proceedings and exclusive choice of jurisdiction between a Japanese manufacturer and a Singapore dealer.

Who were the parties in [2023] SGHC 26?

The appellant was Global Trade Well Pte Ltd, a Singapore-incorporated international commodity trading company and defendant, and the respondent was Tsudakoma Corp, a Japanese textile machine manufacturer and claimant. Their relationship arose from Memoranda of Understanding signed in 2017 and 2018 appointing Global Trade Well as a dealer.