CARLO GIUSEPPE CIVELLI & Anor

[2024] SGHC 143 High Court (General Division) 31 May 2024 • HC/OA 258/2024 ( HC/RA 87/2024 ) • 18 min read

4 cases cited (1 SG, 3 foreign)

Outcome

Appeal allowed

the 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	31 May 2024
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 31 May 2024 — eLitigation. Updated 25 June 2026.

Catchwords

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

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Kwek Mean Luck Delivered

Counsel (5)

Drew & Napier LLC Firm Cavinder Bull Counsel Appellant Chua Ying Ying Erin Counsel Appellant Tay Hong Zhi Gerald Counsel Appellant Woo Shu Yan Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Aster Capital SA (Ltd) Panama Appellant Carlo Giuseppe Civelli Appellant

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.

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.