ACCESS MEDICAL PTE. LTD. & 8 Ors v MHC MEDICAL NETWORK PTE. LTD.

[2023] SGHCR 19 High Court Registrar 23 November 2023 HC/OC 327/2022 ( HC/SUM 2618/2023,HC/SUM 2617/2023 ) 27 min read

4 cases cited (3 SG, 1 foreign) Cited by 1 case

Key facts

Court	High Court Registrar
Decided	23 November 2023
Judge	Vikram Rajaram
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Counsel	Braddell Brothers LLP, Damodara Ong LLC, David Nayar and Associates, Cedric Sun, Colin Wu, Josephine Costan, Ning Jie, Preshin Manmindar, Tammie Khor

Source: [2023] SGHCR 19, High Court Registrar, decided 23 November 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Further and better particulars

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Vikram Rajaram Delivered

Counsel (9)

Braddell Brothers LLP Firm Damodara Ong LLC Firm David Nayar and Associates Firm Cedric Sun Counsel 10th Defendant By Counterclaim Colin Wu Counsel Defendant Josephine Costan Counsel Claimant Ning Jie Counsel 10th Defendant By Counterclaim Preshin Manmindar Counsel 10th Defendant By Counterclaim Tammie Khor Counsel Defendant

Parties (10)

Access Medical Bukit Batok Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Circuit Road Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Jurong West Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Kim Keat Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Marine Terrace Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Redhill Close Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Toa Payoh Pte Ltd Claimant Access Medical Whampoa Pte Ltd Claimant MHC Medical Network Pte Ltd Defendant

Case Significance

Access Medical Pte Ltd and others v MHC Medical Network Pte Ltd [2023] SGHCR 19 is grounds of decision issued by Assistant Registrar Vikram Rajaram in the General Division of the High Court on 23 November 2023, in Originating Claim No 327 of 2022. The nine claimants, general practice clinic operators, were met with applications for further and better particulars brought by the Defendant and the 10th Defendant in Counterclaim within their single applications pending trial. The Assistant Registrar dismissed the Defendant's application, finding the particulars sought were not necessary, but allowed the 10th Defendant in Counterclaim's application in part, ordering particulars needed to understand the basic case to be met on one counterclaim. The grounds cite 4 authorities and have been cited once.

[2023] SGHCR 19 explained

ACCESS MEDICAL PTE. LTD. & 8 Ors v MHC MEDICAL NETWORK PTE. LTD. ([2023] SGHCR 19) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court Registrar on 23 November 2023. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. 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] SGHCR 19 about?

ACCESS MEDICAL PTE. LTD. & 8 Ors v MHC MEDICAL NETWORK PTE. LTD. ([2023] SGHCR 19) is a High Court Registrar decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Further and better particulars”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

How influential is [2023] SGHCR 19?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGHCR 19 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

Summary

Nine Access Medical general-practice clinic companies sued MHC Medical Network Pte Ltd, a clinic administrative support provider, over alleged breaches of Memorandums of Agreement, with a counterclaim also involving the clinics' sole director, Dr Lim. The applications concerned requests for further and better particulars. The Assistant Registrar dismissed the Defendant's application as seeking unnecessary particulars, but allowed in part the 10th Defendant in Counterclaim's application where the particulars were needed to understand the case to be met.

What did Access Medical Pte Ltd v MHC Medical Network Pte Ltd [2023] SGHCR 19 decide?

Assistant Registrar Vikram Rajaram dismissed the Defendant's application for further and better particulars as unnecessary, but allowed in part the 10th Defendant in Counterclaim's application, ordering particulars needed to understand one counterclaim in Originating Claim No 327 of 2022.

Who were the claimants in [2023] SGHCR 19?

The nine claimants were general practice clinic operators in the Access Medical group, suing MHC Medical Network Pte Ltd; the decision concerned applications for further and better particulars pending trial before Assistant Registrar Vikram Rajaram.