CARLO GIUSEPPE CIVELLI & Anor
Outcome
Appeal allowedthe appeal was allowed.
Source: [2024] SGHC 143, High Court (General Division), decided 31 May 2024. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Kwek Mean Luck |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure |
| Outcome | Appeal allowed |
| Counsel | Drew & Napier LLC, Cavinder Bull, Chua Ying Ying Erin, Tay Hong Zhi Gerald, Woo Shu Yan |
Source: [2024] SGHC 143, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (5)
Case Significance
Re Civelli, Carlo Giuseppe and another [2024] SGHC 143 was decided by the General Division of the High Court of Singapore on 31 May 2024, in Originating Application No 258 of 2024 (Registrar's Appeal No 87 of 2024), with the grounds of decision delivered by Kwek Mean Luck J following a hearing on 17 May 2024. The appellants were Carlo Giuseppe Civelli and Aster Capital SA (Ltd) Panama. The matter arose from a Letter of Request dated 20 November 2023 from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas seeking international judicial assistance under the Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters. The central question was whether the Evidence (Civil Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1979 (2020 Rev Ed) ("ECPOJA") precluded the appointment of a private examiner to take evidence for foreign proceedings and instead required examination by the Registrar or a Judge; the judgment held that the ECPOJA did not preclude such an appointment.
[2024] SGHC 143 explained
CARLO GIUSEPPE CIVELLI & Anor ([2024] SGHC 143) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 31 May 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 143 about?
CARLO GIUSEPPE CIVELLI & Anor ([2024] SGHC 143) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Witnesses — Whether the appointment of a private examiner to conduct a pre-trial examination is a step that can be taken by way of obtaining evidence for the purposes of domestic civil proceedings”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Summary
Carlo Giuseppe Civelli and Aster Capital SA (Ltd) Panama appealed against an assistant registrar's dismissal of their application, made under the Evidence (Civil Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1979 and pursuant to a Letter of Request from a United States District Court in Texas under the Hague Convention, to examine a witness, Mr Jacquin, before a private examiner. The central question was whether the Act precluded the appointment of a private examiner to take evidence for foreign proceedings and instead required examination by the Registrar or a Judge. The High Court held that the Act did not preclude appointing a private examiner and allowed the appeal, granting the orders sought on the condition that the examination take place in the presence of and under the direction of the Registrar in Chambers.
What was Re Civelli, Carlo Giuseppe [2024] SGHC 143 about?
Decided on 31 May 2024 by Kwek Mean Luck J in the Singapore High Court, the case considered whether the Evidence (Civil Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1979 precluded appointing a private examiner to take evidence for foreign proceedings; the court held it did not.
Why did [2024] SGHC 143 involve the Hague Convention?
The application arose from a Letter of Request dated 20 November 2023 from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, seeking judicial assistance under the Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters.
Cases Cited (4)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC 143)