YONG TECK CHONG v ERA REALTY NETWORK PTE LTD & Anor

[2024] SGHC 43 High Court (General Division) 14 February 2024 • HC/OA 1206/2023 • 6 min read

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (2)

Parties (3)

Case Significance

Yong Teck Chong v ERA Realty Network Pte Ltd and another [2024] SGHC 43 was decided by Choo Han Teck J in the General Division of the High Court on 14 February 2024, in Originating Application No 1206 of 2023, brought under Order 18 Rule 19(2) of the Rules of Court 2021. The applicant, Mr Yong Teck Chong, a 65-year-old management consultant, had sued the first respondent, ERA Realty Network Pte Ltd (a real estate agency), and the second respondent, Tan Ching Siong (its agent), in MC/MC 3465 of 2022 for the return of $5,350 paid as commission. That case was settled and a settlement agreement was recorded before DR Lewis Tan on 2 June 2022.

The judgment records that Mr Yong later applied in MC/OA 9 of 2023 to set aside the settlement order, which was dismissed by DR Elaine Lim; his appeal in MC/RA 8 of 2023 was dismissed by PDJ Clement Seah; and his application for leave to appeal in MC/SUM 3588 of 2023 was refused. In the present application he sought to set aside PDJ Seah's refusal of leave and an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. After the respondents objected, the court allowed an oral application to regularise and amend the matter. The respondents were represented by Christopher Bridges Law Corporation (Kenneth Tan Siang Teck). The catchword is Civil Procedure (Appeals, Leave).

Summary

In this application before the General Division of the High Court, Mr Yong Teck Chong, a management consultant, sought to set aside a District Judge's refusal to grant leave to appeal, together with an extension of time to file a notice of appeal, arising from a Magistrates' Court action against a real estate agency and its agent for the return of $5,350 paid as commission, which had earlier been settled by a recorded settlement agreement. The issue concerned leave to appeal in civil proceedings, the application having been regularised as an application for leave to appeal and an extension of time. The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal, finding the applicant's account unsupported by evidence and inconsistent with the documentary evidence produced, made no order for an extension of time, and fixed costs at $800 plus disbursements payable by the applicant to the respondents.

What was Yong Teck Chong v ERA Realty Network Pte Ltd [2024] SGHC 43 about?

Decided by Choo Han Teck J on 14 February 2024, the case concerned Mr Yong Teck Chong's application to set aside PDJ Clement Seah's refusal of leave to appeal and for an extension of time, arising from a dispute over $5,350 in commission paid to ERA Realty Network Pte Ltd.

What was the original dispute behind the [2024] SGHC 43 application?

Mr Yong Teck Chong sued ERA Realty Network Pte Ltd and its agent Tan Ching Siong in MC/MC 3465 of 2022 for the return of $5,350 paid as commission. The case was settled, with a settlement agreement recorded before DR Lewis Tan on 2 June 2022.

Referenced in

Legal concepts & references

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC 43)