SPAMHAUS TECHNOLOGY LTD v REPUTATION ADMINISTRATION SERVICE PTE LTD

[2023] SGHC 294 High Court (General Division) 17 October 2023 HC/OC 139/2022 ( HC/RA 84/2023 )

6 cases cited (4 SG, 2 foreign) Cited by 5 cases

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	17 October 2023
Judge	Chan Seng Onn
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure, Contract
Counsel	Aequitas Law LLP, CTLC Law Corporation, Glenda Lim, Han Wah Teng

Source: [2023] SGHC 294, High Court (General Division), decided 17 October 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Delay Contract — Formation Civil Procedure – Judgment entered in default of defence – Setting aside default judgment

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Contract

Judges (1)

Chan Seng Onn Delivered

Counsel (4)

Aequitas Law LLP Firm CTLC Law Corporation Firm

Glenda Lim Counsel for the respondent

Han Wah Teng Counsel for the appellant

Parties (2)

Reputation Administration Service Pte Ltd Respondent

Spamhaus Technology Ltd Appellant

Case Significance

Spamhaus Technology Ltd v Reputation Administration Service Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 294 is a grounds of decision of Chan Seng Onn SJ in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 17 October 2023 in Originating Claim No 139 of 2022 (Registrar's Appeal No 84 of 2023). The appellant, Spamhaus Technology Ltd, a United Kingdom company providing services relating to the filtering and control of spam, appealed against the Assistant Registrar's decision in Summons No 752 of 2023 setting aside a default judgment against the respondent, Reputation Administration Service Pte Ltd, a Singapore information-technology and email-services company whose sole director is Mr Goel Adesh Kumar. Addressing contract formation and delay, Chan Seng Onn SJ allowed the appeal and ordered that the default judgment be upheld.

Summary

Spamhaus Technology Ltd, a UK company, appealed against an Assistant Registrar's decision setting aside a default judgment obtained against Reputation Administration Service Pte Ltd, a Singapore company, in a dispute connected to a Reseller Agreement. The issues included delay and the setting aside of default judgment. The High Court accepted the respondent's explanation for its delay but nonetheless allowed the appeal and ordered the default judgment to be restored, with costs of $4,000 payable by the respondent.

What was Spamhaus Technology v Reputation Administration Service [2023] SGHC 294 about?

It was an appeal before Chan Seng Onn SJ by UK company Spamhaus Technology Ltd against an Assistant Registrar's order setting aside a default judgment against Singapore company Reputation Administration Service Pte Ltd, decided on 17 October 2023.

How did the court rule in [2023] SGHC 294?

Chan Seng Onn SJ allowed Spamhaus Technology's appeal and ordered that the default judgment be upheld, addressing issues of contract formation and delay in the respondent's application to set aside the default judgment.