Cachet Multi Strategy Fund SPC on behalf of Cachet Special Opportunities SP v FENG SHI & 2 Ors

[2024] SGHCR 8 High Court Registrar 19 August 2024 • HC/OC 10/2022 ( HC/SUM 475/2024 ) • 64 min read
19 cases cited (18 SG, 1 foreign) Cited by 4 cases

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (4)

Parties (4)

Case Significance

Cachet Multi Strategy Fund SPC on behalf of Cachet Special Opportunities SP v Feng Shi and others [2024] SGHCR 8 was decided by AR Elton Tan Xue Yang in the General Division of the High Court on 19 August 2024, in Originating Claim No 10 of 2022 (Summons No 475 of 2024), with hearings on 16 and 26 July 2024 and judgment reserved. The application was brought by the claimant for the production of 14 categories of documents pursuant to O 11 r 3 of the Rules of Court 2021, against defendants Feng Shi, Alex SK Liu and Haven Global Network Pte Ltd.

The judgment addressed Order 11 Rule 5(2) of the Rules of Court 2021, which enjoins the court from ordering production of any document that is part of a party's private or internal correspondence, in any format and wherever stored, subject to two exceptions under Rule 5(2)(a) and (b): where it is a "special case" or the correspondence is a known adverse document. The judgment noted that O 11 r 5(2) was introduced in the ROC 2021 following revisions proposed by the Civil Justice Commission and has no precedent in past versions of the Rules of Court. The second defendant, as respondent in the application, objected to the majority of the requests on the basis that they related to internal correspondence and that the exceptions did not apply, and argued that six of the 14 categories were objectionable. The catchwords concerned civil procedure, production of documents, legal privilege, and private or internal correspondence. The claimant was represented by WongPartnership LLP, with counsel Ho Yi Jie, and the defendant by WNLEX LLC, with counsel Samantha Ong.

[2024] SGHCR 8 explained

Cachet Multi Strategy Fund SPC on behalf of Cachet Special Opportunities SP v FENG SHI & 2 Ors ([2024] SGHCR 8) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court Registrar on 19 August 2024. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 4 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] SGHCR 8 about?

Cachet Multi Strategy Fund SPC on behalf of Cachet Special Opportunities SP v FENG SHI & 2 Ors ([2024] SGHCR 8) is a High Court Registrar decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Production of documents — Legal privilege” and “Civil Procedure — Production of documents — Private or internal correspondence”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2024] SGHCR 8 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 85 and [2024] SGHC 53. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2024] SGHCR 8?

Within this corpus, [2024] SGHCR 8 has been cited by 4 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

In the General Division of the High Court, the claimant, a Cayman Islands hedge fund, applied for production of 14 categories of documents under the Rules of Court 2021 in proceedings against the first defendant (a co-founder and CEO of the third defendant company) and others. The second defendant objected, arguing that most requests concerned private or internal correspondence falling within the prohibition in Order 11 Rule 5(2), that six categories sought privileged documents, and that he lacked possession or control of the remaining documents. Assistant Registrar Elton Tan Xue Yang, after considering the scope of Order 11 Rule 5(2), dismissed the application for production and indicated he would hear the parties on costs.

What did Cachet Multi Strategy Fund v Feng Shi [2024] SGHCR 8 decide about internal correspondence?

Cachet Multi Strategy Fund SPC applied for production of 14 categories of documents under O 11 r 3 of the Rules of Court 2021. AR Elton Tan Xue Yang examined O 11 r 5(2), which bars production of private or internal correspondence subject to two exceptions.

What are the exceptions to the bar on producing internal correspondence under Order 11 Rule 5(2)?

Under Order 11 Rule 5(2) of the Rules of Court 2021, the court will not order production of private or internal correspondence except where, under rules 5(2)(a) and (b), it is a "special case" or the correspondence is a known adverse document, as discussed in [2024] SGHCR 8.

Cases Cited (19)

SG (10)
[2007] SGHC 69 [2008] SGHC 98 [2017] SGHC 16 [2017] SGHCR 15 [2023] SGHC 301 [2023] SGHCR 17 [2023] SGMC 46 [2023] SGMC 83 [2024] SGHC 53 [2024] SGHC 85
SLR (8)
[2002] 1 SLR(R) 604 [2002] 2 SLR(R) 465 [2007] 2 SLR(R) 367 [2016] 5 SLR 590 [2018] 4 SLR 391 [2023] 3 SLR 1574 [2023] 5 SLR 806 [2024] 4 SLR 540
AU (1)
[1999] VSC 131

Cited By (4)

Referenced in

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2024] SGHCR 8)