Renault SAS v Liberty Engineering Group Pte. Ltd.
Key facts
| Court | Singapore International Commercial Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Roger Giles |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure |
| Counsel | Ascendant Legal LLC, Wong Partnership LLP, Chew Kei-Jin, Chia Shi Mei, Daniel Liu Zhao Xiang, Lee Chia Ming, Clare, T Abirami |
Source: [2024] SGHC(I) 22, Singapore International Commercial Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (7)
Case Significance
Renault SAS v Liberty Engineering Group Pte Ltd and another matter [2024] SGHC(I) 22 was a grounds of decision of the Singapore International Commercial Court delivered by Roger Giles IJ on 15 July 2024, in Originating Application No 9 of 2023 (Summons No 18 of 2024) and Originating Application No 7 of 2024, heard on 19 June 2024. In a claim under a guarantee, Renault SAS ("Renault") had obtained judgment against Liberty Engineering Group Pte Ltd ("LEG") for EUR 5,250,025.61 and interest. LEG appealed against the decision and applied, in separate applications, for a stay of enforcement of the judgment and for an injunction restraining Renault from presenting a winding-up application against it founded on the judgment, both until the disposal of the appeal.
The applications were heard together, with decisions announced at the conclusion of the hearing and full reasons to follow. Roger Giles IJ indicated that a stay order would be made on condition of payment into court of the judgment sum and interest to 31 July 2024, and that, if it remained a live issue, a restraining order would be made. The restraining order was announced on the indication that, despite the judgment, Renault's claim remained a bona fide disputed debt and a winding-up application founded on it would be an abuse of process. Renault was represented by Wong Partnership LLP and LEG by Ascendant Legal LLC.
[2024] SGHC(I) 22 explained
Renault SAS v Liberty Engineering Group Pte. Ltd. ([2024] SGHC(I) 22) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Singapore International Commercial Court on 15 July 2024. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. 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 [2024] SGHC(I) 22 about?
Renault SAS v Liberty Engineering Group Pte. Ltd. ([2024] SGHC(I) 22) is a Singapore International Commercial Court decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Judgments and orders — Enforcement”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2024] SGHC(I) 22 consider?
The judgment refers to Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2024] SGHC(I) 22 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 47 and [2024] SGHC(I) 6. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
What was the judgment sum in Renault SAS v Liberty Engineering Group Pte Ltd [2024] SGHC(I) 22?
Renault SAS obtained judgment against Liberty Engineering Group Pte Ltd for EUR 5,250,025.61 and interest under a guarantee claim. Liberty Engineering appealed and applied for a stay of enforcement and an injunction restraining a winding-up application, decided by Roger Giles IJ on 15 July 2024.
What did the Singapore International Commercial Court order in Renault SAS v Liberty Engineering Group ([2024] SGHC(I) 22)?
Roger Giles IJ ordered a stay of enforcement conditional on payment into court of the judgment sum and interest by 31 July 2024, and indicated a restraining order would be made because Renault's claim remained a bona fide disputed debt and any winding-up application would be an abuse of process.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (11)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC(I) 22)