ILC CO., LTD. v SAITAMA HIROSHI & 3 Ors

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 280 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGHC 280 High Court (General Division) 4 October 2023 HC/OA 652/2023 ( HC/SUM 2452/2023 ) 5 min read

1 cases cited

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	4 October 2023
Judge	Choo Han Teck
Charges / claim	Contempt of court
Counsel	Focus Law Asia LLC, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, Ang Leong Hao, Edward N. Ong, Faith Hwang, Jansen Chow, Mark Tan, Zeng Hanyi

Source: [2023] SGHC 280, High Court (General Division), decided 4 October 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Contempt of court — Civil contempt — Breach of disclosure order under Mareva injunction

Practice Areas

Contempt of court

Judges (1)

Choo Han Teck Delivered

Counsel (8)

Focus Law Asia LLC Firm Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP Firm Ang Leong Hao Counsel Applicant Edward N. Ong Counsel Respondent Faith Hwang Counsel Applicant Jansen Chow Counsel Applicant Mark Tan Counsel Respondent Zeng Hanyi Counsel Respondent

Parties (5)

Asia Capital Management Pte Ltd Respondent ILC Co, Ltd Applicant Hora Yohei Respondent Oshima Yumiko Respondent Saitama Hiroshi Respondent

Case Significance

ILC Co, Ltd v Saitama Hiroshi and others [2023] SGHC 280 is a grounds of decision of Choo Han Teck J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 4 October 2023 in Originating Application No 652 of 2023 (Summons No 2452 of 2023). The applicant, ILC Co, Ltd, brought committal proceedings against the third and fourth respondents, Asia Capital Management Pte Ltd and Oshima Yumiko, for civil contempt through breach of a disclosure order under a Mareva injunction, pursuant to leave granted in [2023] SGHC 206. The first and second respondents were enjoined up to US$6,718,925.11 and the third and fourth respondents to US$194,031.23; the applicant's counsel contended that the respondents' partial disclosure breached the injunction and that they were assisting the first respondent to conceal his assets.

[2023] SGHC 280 explained

ILC CO., LTD. v SAITAMA HIROSHI & 3 Ors ([2023] SGHC 280) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 4 October 2023. It is categorised under Contempt of court. 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 280 about?

ILC CO., LTD. v SAITAMA HIROSHI & 3 Ors ([2023] SGHC 280) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Contempt of court — Civil contempt — Breach of disclosure order under Mareva injunction”, 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 280 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2023] SGHC 280 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGHC 206. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

Summary

ILC Co, Ltd applied to commit the third and fourth respondents for civil contempt, alleging they breached a disclosure order under a Mareva injunction by only partially disclosing assets. Those respondents had secured the full US$194,031.23 claim against them in a separate DBS account and argued the disclosure obligation was being used for the extraneous purpose of pursuing the first respondent's assets. The High Court agreed and dismissed the committal application, awarding $4,000 in costs to each respondent.

What was ILC Co, Ltd v Saitama Hiroshi [2023] SGHC 280 about?

It was a committal application before Choo Han Teck J, decided on 4 October 2023, alleging civil contempt by the third and fourth respondents through breach of a disclosure order under a Mareva injunction obtained by ILC Co, Ltd.

What were the sums covered by the Mareva injunction in [2023] SGHC 280?

The Mareva injunction enjoined the first and second respondents up to US$6,718,925.11 and the third and fourth respondents up to US$194,031.23, the latter having set aside the full claim sum against them in a separate DBS bank account.