Pharma Inc. (Wordwide) Pte. Ltd. v Limb Salvage And Revision Arthroplasty Surgery Pte Ltd

[2023] SGHC 31 High Court (General Division) 13 February 2023 HC/OA 831/2022

3 cases cited

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	13 February 2023
Judge	Hri Kumar Nair
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Counsel	Jimmy Yap & Co, Prestige Legal LLP, James Joseph s/o J Joseph, Yap Neng Boo Jimmy

Source: [2023] SGHC 31, High Court (General Division), decided 13 February 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Extension of time

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Hri Kumar Nair Delivered

Counsel (4)

Jimmy Yap & Co Firm

Prestige Legal LLP Firm

James Joseph s/o J Joseph Counsel for the appellant

Yap Neng Boo Jimmy Counsel for the respondent

Parties (2)

Limb Salvage and Revision Arthroplasty Surgery Pte Ltd Respondent

Pharma Inc (Wordwide) Pte Ltd Appellant

Case Significance

Pharma Inc (Wordwide) Pte Ltd v Limb Salvage and Revision Arthroplasty Surgery Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 31 was decided by Hri Kumar Nair J in the General Division of the High Court on 13 February 2023, in Originating Application No 831 of 2022. The applicant sought an extension of time to file a notice of appeal against a decision of District Judge Vince Gui Chuan Cheng made on 25 October 2022, after a three-day trial in which judgment and costs were awarded against the applicant. The time for filing expired on 8 November 2022; attempts to file on 8 and 9 November 2022 were rejected, and a State Courts application filed on 10 November 2022 was later withdrawn as it should have been filed in the High Court. This application was filed on 8 December 2022 on the basis that the deadline had been breached by one day.

Summary

Pharma Inc (Wordwide) Pte Ltd applied for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal against a District Judge's decision, made after a three-day trial, which awarded judgment and costs against it and dismissed its counterclaim in a dispute over the sale of machines. The applicant had missed the filing deadline and compounded the delay by wrongly applying in the State Courts. The court dismissed the application, finding no reasons given for the delay and that the prospects of an appeal were hopeless, awarding the respondent S$4,300 in costs.

What did the applicant seek in Pharma Inc v Limb Salvage [2023] SGHC 31?

The applicant sought an extension of time to file a notice of appeal against District Judge Vince Gui Chuan Cheng's decision of 25 October 2022. The filing deadline expired on 8 November 2022, and the applicant said it was breached by only one day.

Why were the applicant's earlier filing attempts rejected in [2023] SGHC 31?

An attempt to file the notice of appeal on 8 November 2022 was rejected because the required security was not furnished, and a further attempt on 9 November 2022 was rejected because the appeal deadline had passed.