Finaport Pte. Ltd. v Techteryx Ltd.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Vinodh Coomaraswamy |
| Charges / claim | Conflict of Laws, Civil Procedure |
| Counsel | Bayfront Law LLC, Tan Kok Quan Partnership, Abdul Mateen Bajerai, Foo Yiew Min, Keith Tnee, Paras Manohar Lalwani, Tyronne Toh |
Source: [2024] SGHC 329, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (7)
Case Significance
Finaport Pte Ltd v Techteryx Ltd [2024] SGHC 329 is a Grounds of Decision of the General Division of the High Court (Originating Application No 474 of 2024) delivered by Vinodh Coomaraswamy J on 27 December 2024, following a hearing on 30 July 2024. The applicant, Finaport Pte Ltd, a Singapore-incorporated company providing investment advice and regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore, sought an anti-suit injunction to restrain the respondent, Techteryx Ltd, from pursuing litigation pending in Hong Kong in which the respondent was the claimant and the applicant the second defendant. Vinodh Coomaraswamy J dismissed the application with costs, holding that he did not accept that the Hong Kong Suit was vexatious or oppressive, or that the respondent had commenced or was pursuing it in breach of any obligation.
[2024] SGHC 329 explained
Finaport Pte. Ltd. v Techteryx Ltd. ([2024] SGHC 329) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 27 December 2024. It is categorised under Conflict of Laws and Civil Procedure. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 2 other reported Singapore judgments, 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 [2024] SGHC 329 about?
Finaport Pte. Ltd. v Techteryx Ltd. ([2024] SGHC 329) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Conflict of Laws - Natural forum”, “Civil Procedure - Injunctions - Anti-suit injunction”, “Conflict of Laws - Restraint of foreign proceedings - Comity - Anti-suit injunction”, and “Conflict of Laws - Restraint of foreign proceedings - Breach of agreement - Anti-suit injunction”, 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 329 consider?
The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50), FDT is licensed as a trust company under the Hong Kong Trustee Ordinance (Cap 29), Party to this Agreement shall have no rights under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act (Cap 53B), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322), among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
How influential is [2024] SGHC 329?
Within this corpus, [2024] SGHC 329 has been cited by 2 later reported Singapore judgments. 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
Finaport Pte Ltd, a Singapore-incorporated investment adviser, sought an anti-suit injunction to restrain Techteryx Ltd, the owner and administrator of the TrueUSD stablecoin, from pursuing litigation pending in Hong Kong in which Finaport was the second defendant. The proceeding raised issues of natural forum and the restraint of foreign proceedings on grounds of comity, breach of agreement, and vexatious and oppressive conduct. The court dismissed the application, finding that it was not persuaded the Hong Kong suit was vexatious or oppressive or pursued in breach of any obligation, and ordered Finaport to pay the respondent's costs fixed at $9,000 including disbursements and GST.
What did the court decide in Finaport v Techteryx [2024] SGHC 329?
Vinodh Coomaraswamy J dismissed Finaport Pte Ltd's application for an anti-suit injunction with costs on 27 December 2024, finding the Hong Kong Suit brought by Techteryx Ltd was neither vexatious nor oppressive, and was not pursued in breach of any obligation owed to Finaport.
When will Singapore courts refuse an anti-suit injunction restraining foreign proceedings ([2024] SGHC 329)?
In Finaport v Techteryx [2024] SGHC 329, Vinodh Coomaraswamy J declined an anti-suit injunction where the foreign Hong Kong proceedings were not shown to be vexatious or oppressive to the applicant, nor commenced or pursued in breach of any agreement or obligation.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (13)
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 329)