ARMIRA CAPITAL LIMITED v JI ZENGHE & 2 Ors

[2025] SGHCR 18 High Court Registrar 20 June 2025 HC/BC 171/2024

16 cases cited (12 SG, 4 foreign)

Key facts

Court	High Court Registrar
Decided	20 June 2025
Judge	Gan Kam Yuin
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Counsel	Harry Elias Partnership LLP, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, Audrey Foo Xue Ning, Chong Ee Jin, Gan Eng Tong, Kok Yee Keong (Guo Yiqiang), Tan Chau Yee, Wayne Yeo (Yang Weien), Yeap Poh Leong Andre

Source: [2025] SGHCR 18, High Court Registrar, decided 20 June 2025 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Costs — Assessment

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Gan Kam Yuin Delivered

Counsel (9)

Harry Elias Partnership LLP Firm Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP Firm

Audrey Foo Xue Ning Counsel for the respondent

Chong Ee Jin Counsel for the respondent

Gan Eng Tong Counsel for the applicant

Kok Yee Keong (Guo Yiqiang) Counsel for the respondent

Tan Chau Yee Counsel for the respondent Wayne Yeo (Yang Weien) Counsel for the applicant Yeap Poh Leong Andre Counsel for the applicant

Parties (4)

Armira Capital Ltd Applicant

Oriental Straits Fund III Respondent

Fan Xianyong Respondent

Ji Zenghe Respondent

Case Significance

[2025] SGHCR 18 is a High Court Registrar decision dated 20 June 2025 concerning Civil Procedure, specifically addressing costs. The judgment was delivered by Gan Kam Yuin. The case was brought by Armira Capital Ltd (applicant) against Oriental Straits Fund III and others (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP and Harry Elias Partnership LLP. The judgment cites 16 cases (12 Singapore, 4 foreign) and references 1 statutory provision, namely the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.

Summary

Armira Capital, a UK-based financial advisory company, sought assessment of costs on an indemnity basis after successfully setting aside default judgments and obtaining dismissal of proceedings brought against it in Singapore. The court assessed costs at S$609,085 across three sets of orders, applying principles for both pre- and post-transfer periods, and accepted Armira's approach of first applying a co-defendant's indemnity against unrecovered out-of-pocket costs before reducing the assessed amount.

What was decided in [2025] SGHCR 18?

[2025] SGHCR 18 (ARMIRA CAPITAL LIMITED v JI ZENGHE & 2 Ors) is a High Court Registrar decision from 20 June 2025 addressing Civil Procedure, specifically costs. The judgment was delivered by Gan Kam Yuin.

Who were the parties in ARMIRA CAPITAL LIMITED v JI ZENGHE & 2 Ors ([2025] SGHCR 18)?

The applicant in [2025] SGHCR 18 was Armira Capital Ltd, and the respondent was Oriental Straits Fund III, Fan Xianyong. Legal representation included Harry Elias Partnership LLP and Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP. The case was decided on 20 June 2025 in the High Court Registrar.

Which judge decided [2025] SGHCR 18?

[2025] SGHCR 18 was delivered by Gan Kam Yuin in the High Court Registrar on 20 June 2025. The case concerned Civil Procedure.

What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHCR 18 cite?

[2025] SGHCR 18 cites 16 prior decisions, including 4 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Supreme Court of Judicature Act.

Statutes Cited

Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322) Cases on this Act →

Cases Cited (16)

SG (2)

[2016] SGHC 278 [2023] SGHC 195

SLR (10)

[1988] 1 SLR(R) 76 [2009] 4 SLR(R) 732 [2011] 3 SLR 1052 [2014] 1 SLR 245 [2014] 3 SLR 909 [2015] 1 SLR 496 [2015] 3 SLR 1105 [2015] 4 SLR 1019 [2018] 3 SLR 1 [2023] 1 SLR 96

UK (2)

[1961] 2 WLR 1011 [2006] EWHC 90068

AU (2)

[2002] FCA 564 [2018] FCAFC 41