DJY v DJZ & Anor

[2025] SGHC(A) 18 High Court (Appellate Division) 12 September 2025 AD/CA 97/2024 58 min read
18 cases cited (16 SG, 2 foreign)

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed with costs fixed at $109,000 all-in in favour of the first respondent.

Source: [2025] SGHC(A) 18, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 12 September 2025. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided
Judges Hri Kumar Nair, Kannan Ramesh, Steven Chong
Charges / claim Banking
Outcome Appeal dismissed
Sentence / award $109,000
Counsel Drew & Napier LLC, WongPartnership LLP, Desiree Chong Ci En, Foo Hsien Weng, Hing Shan Shan Blossom, Jill Ann Koh Ying (Xu Ying), Leau Jun Li, Lim Mingguan, Lin Weiqi Wendy, Lu En Hui, Sarah, Wee Jong Xuan

Source: [2025] SGHC(A) 18, High Court (Appellate Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (3)

Counsel (11)

Parties (3)

Case Significance

[2025] SGHC(A) 18 is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision dated 12 September 2025 concerning Banking, specifically addressing performance bonds. The judgment was delivered by Steven Chong, with Hri Kumar Nair and Kannan Ramesh on the coram. The case was brought by DJY (appellant) against DJZ and others (respondent). Legal representation was provided by WongPartnership LLP and Drew & Napier LLC. The judgment cites 18 cases (16 Singapore, 2 foreign) and references 1 statutory provision, namely the Evidence Act.

[2025] SGHC(A) 18 explained

DJY v DJZ & Anor ([2025] SGHC(A) 18) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 12 September 2025. It is categorised under Banking. 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 [2025] SGHC(A) 18 about?

DJY v DJZ & Anor ([2025] SGHC(A) 18) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Banking — Performance bonds — Restraining beneficiary from calling on standby letter of credit on ground of unconscionability” and “Banking — Performance bonds — Restraining beneficiary from calling on standby letter of credit on ground of discrepancies in documents tendered”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2025] SGHC(A) 18 consider?

The judgment refers to Evidence Act (Cap 97). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2025] SGHC(A) 18 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 301. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

Summary

An appeal against the dismissal of an injunction application to restrain a call on a US$8.5 million standby letter of credit. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal, finding no unconscionability in the beneficiary's call despite the appellant's evolving arguments, and awarded costs of $109,000 to the first respondent.

What was decided in [2025] SGHC(A) 18?

[2025] SGHC(A) 18 (DJY v DJZ & Anor) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 12 September 2025 addressing Banking, specifically performance bonds. The judgment was delivered by Steven Chong.

Who were the parties in DJY v DJZ & Anor ([2025] SGHC(A) 18)?

The appellant in [2025] SGHC(A) 18 was DJY, and the respondent was DJZ, DKA. Legal representation included WongPartnership LLP and Drew & Napier LLC. The case was decided on 12 September 2025 in the High Court (Appellate Division).

Which judge decided [2025] SGHC(A) 18?

[2025] SGHC(A) 18 was delivered by Steven Chong in the High Court (Appellate Division) on 12 September 2025. Hri Kumar Nair and Kannan Ramesh also sat on the coram. The case concerned Banking.

What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC(A) 18 cite?

[2025] SGHC(A) 18 cites 18 prior decisions, including 2 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Evidence Act.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (18)

SG (2)
[2017] SGHC 127 [2024] SGHC 301
SLR (14)
[2006] 1 SLR(R) 57 [2008] 3 SLR(R) 957 [2009] 2 SLR(R) 532 [2012] 1 SLR 152 [2012] 3 SLR 125 [2012] 3 SLR 352 [2018] 1 SLR 317 [2018] 1 SLR 363 [2018] 2 SLR 1207 [2019] 2 SLR 295 [2021] 3 SLR 571 [2021] 5 SLR 934 [2024] 1 SLR 1 [2025] 1 SLR 492
UK (2)
[1960] 1 WLR 196 [1981] 3 All ER 533

Related cases

Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.

Referenced in

Statutes interpreted in this judgment

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2025] SGHC(A) 18)