SPACKMAN ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LIMITED v WOO SANG CHEOL
Key facts
| Court | High Court Registrar |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Reuben Ong |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure, Abuse of Process |
| Counsel | Breakpoint LLC, WongPartnership LLP, Benson Fan, Leau Jun Li (Phoebe), Leow Jiamin, Nicholas Poon |
Source: [2025] SGHCR 14, High Court Registrar, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Case Significance
[2025] SGHCR 14 is a High Court Registrar decision dated 23 May 2025 concerning Abuse of Process and Civil Procedure, specifically addressing unless orders, discovery of documents, and riddick principle. The judgment was delivered by Reuben Ong. The case was brought by Spackman Entertainment Group Limited (plaintiff) against Woo Sang Cheol (defendant). Legal representation was provided by Breakpoint LLC and WongPartnership LLP. The judgment cites 17 cases (8 Singapore, 9 foreign) and references 2 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Procedure Code and the Securities and Futures Act.
[2025] SGHCR 14 explained
SPACKMAN ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LIMITED v WOO SANG CHEOL ([2025] SGHCR 14) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court Registrar on 23 May 2025. It is categorised under Civil Procedure and Abuse of Process. 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] SGHCR 14 about?
SPACKMAN ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LIMITED v WOO SANG CHEOL ([2025] SGHCR 14) is a High Court Registrar decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Unless orders”, “Civil Procedure — Discovery of documents — Redaction”, and “Abuse of Process — Riddick principle — Cogency of the evidence”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2025] SGHCR 14 consider?
The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) and Securities and Futures Act (Cap 289). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2025] SGHCR 14 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 259. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
In a defamation suit by a film production company against a businessman, three interlocutory applications were heard: the defendant's specific discovery application, the plaintiff's unless order application, and the plaintiff's application to be released from its Riddick undertaking. The court granted specific discovery in part for 8 of 11 categories, dismissed the unless order application, and partially granted the Riddick release for use of documents in related proceedings in Korea and the US.
What was decided in [2025] SGHCR 14?
[2025] SGHCR 14 (SPACKMAN ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LIMITED v WOO SANG CHEOL) is a High Court Registrar decision from 23 May 2025 addressing Abuse of Process and Civil Procedure, specifically unless orders, discovery of documents, and riddick principle. The judgment was delivered by Reuben Ong.
Who were the parties in SPACKMAN ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LIMITED v WOO SANG CHEOL ([2025] SGHCR 14)?
The plaintiff in [2025] SGHCR 14 was Spackman Entertainment Group Limited, and the defendant was Woo Sang Cheol. Legal representation included WongPartnership LLP and Breakpoint LLC. The case was decided on 23 May 2025 in the High Court Registrar.
Which judge decided [2025] SGHCR 14?
[2025] SGHCR 14 was delivered by Reuben Ong in the High Court Registrar on 23 May 2025. The case concerned Abuse of Process and Civil Procedure.
What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHCR 14 cite?
[2025] SGHCR 14 cites 17 prior decisions, including 9 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Criminal Procedure Code, Securities and Futures Act.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (17)
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 ([2025] SGHCR 14)