COSHIELD GLOBAL PTY LTD & 2 Ors v KRITTAPAJ SORRALUMP

[2023] SGHC 319 High Court (General Division) 8 November 2023 HC/OA 666/2023 ( HC/SUM 2563/2023 )

2 cases cited

Outcome

Application dismissed

“The application is dismissed.”

Source: [2023] SGHC 319, High Court (General Division), decided 8 November 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	8 November 2023
Judge	Choo Han Teck
Charges / claim	Contempt of court
Outcome	Application dismissed
Counsel	Eldan Law LLP, Phoenix Law Corporation, Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim, Raheja Binte Jamaluddin, Sofia Bennita d/o Mohamed Bakhash, Uthayasurian s/o Sidambaram

Source: [2023] SGHC 319, High Court (General Division), decided 8 November 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Contempt of court — Civil contempt — Impecunious judgment debtor not to be committed for being unable to pay judgment debts

Practice Areas

Contempt of court

Judges (1)

Choo Han Teck Delivered

Counsel (6)

Eldan Law LLP Firm Phoenix Law Corporation Firm Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim Counsel for the applicant

Raheja Binte Jamaluddin Counsel for the applicant

Sofia Bennita d/o Mohamed Bakhash Counsel for the defendant Uthayasurian s/o Sidambaram Counsel for the defendant

Parties (4)

CoShield Global Pty Ltd Applicant

CoShield Global Trading Limited Applicant

CoShield NZ Limited Applicant

Krittapaj Sorralump Defendant

Case Significance

CoShield Global Pty Ltd and others v Krittapaj Sorralump [2023] SGHC 319 is a judgment of the General Division of the High Court delivered by Choo Han Teck J on 8 November 2023 in Originating Application No 666 of 2023 (Summons No 2563 of 2023). Australian company CoShield Global Pty Ltd, with New Zealand companies CoShield Global Trading Limited and CoShield NZ Limited, pursued committal against Krittapaj Sorralump, a Thai national and former CEO of the wound-up Nakawat TD Pte Ltd, over an interim consent judgment obtained on 27 June 2022. That judgment followed a suit alleging misrepresentations that induced the purchase of 75 million boxes of nitrile gloves for US$26,928,907. The case addressed the principle that an impecunious judgment debtor is not to be committed for civil contempt for being unable to pay judgment debts.

Summary

Three applicant companies in the CoShield group sought to commit for civil contempt a Thai national resident in Singapore who had failed to comply with terms of consent judgments arising from alleged misrepresentations that induced them to buy nitrile gloves. The issue was whether an impecunious judgment debtor unable to pay should be committed. The court found the defendant analogous to an impecunious debtor, unable to secure employment or deal with his assets due to a Mareva injunction, and dismissed the committal application.

What was CoShield Global Pty Ltd v Krittapaj Sorralump [2023] SGHC 319 about?

It was a High Court committal matter decided by Choo Han Teck J on 8 November 2023, addressing whether an impecunious judgment debtor, Krittapaj Sorralump, could be committed for civil contempt for being unable to pay judgment debts owed to the CoShield companies.

How much was claimed in the CoShield [2023] SGHC 319 dispute?

The underlying suit alleged fraudulent or negligent misrepresentations that induced the CoShield applicants to buy 75 million boxes of nitrile gloves for US$26,928,907, leading to an interim consent judgment obtained on 27 June 2022.