LE NINH TIEN v RAINBOW FOREST ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 5 Ors
Key facts
| Court | High Court Registrar |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Perry Peh |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure |
| Counsel | Titanium Law Chambers LLC, Tito Isaac & Co LLC, Alexius Chew, Francis Chan, Jaspreet Kaur, Tan Youliang |
Source: [2025] SGHCR 23, High Court Registrar, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Case Significance
[2025] SGHCR 23 is a High Court Registrar decision dated 18 July 2025 concerning Civil Procedure, specifically addressing stay of proceedings. The judgment was delivered by Perry Peh. The case was brought by Le Ninh Tien (plaintiff) against Rainbow Forest Enterprises Ltd and others (defendant). Legal representation was provided by Titanium Law Chambers LLC and Tito Isaac & Co LLC. The judgment cites 21 cases (19 Singapore, 2 foreign) and references 2 statutory provisions, including the Companies Act and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act. This decision has been cited by 1 subsequent judgment in the dataset.
[2025] SGHCR 23 explained
LE NINH TIEN v RAINBOW FOREST ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 5 Ors ([2025] SGHCR 23) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court Registrar on 18 July 2025. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, 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 [2025] SGHCR 23 about?
LE NINH TIEN v RAINBOW FOREST ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 5 Ors ([2025] SGHCR 23) is a High Court Registrar decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Stay of proceedings — Counterclaim”, 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 23 consider?
The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50) and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
How influential is [2025] SGHCR 23?
Within this corpus, [2025] SGHCR 23 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. 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
A minority shareholder in a Singapore ship-owning company applied to dismiss or stay the sixth defendant's counterclaim on forum non conveniens grounds, arguing the dispute should be tried in Vietnam or Cambodia. The court dismissed the application, holding that a claimant is not precluded from challenging jurisdiction over a counterclaim, but found Singapore was the more appropriate forum due to the procedural convenience of trying the claim and counterclaim together given their overlapping factual matrix.
What was decided in [2025] SGHCR 23?
[2025] SGHCR 23 (LE NINH TIEN v RAINBOW FOREST ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 5 Ors) is a High Court Registrar decision from 18 July 2025 addressing Civil Procedure, specifically stay of proceedings. The judgment was delivered by Perry Peh.
Who were the parties in LE NINH TIEN v RAINBOW FOREST ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 5 Ors ([2025] SGHCR 23)?
The plaintiff in [2025] SGHCR 23 was Le Ninh Tien, and the defendant was Rainbow Forest Enterprises Ltd, Song Doc MV19 Pte Ltd. Legal representation included Titanium Law Chambers LLC and Tito Isaac & Co LLC. The case was decided on 18 July 2025 in the High Court Registrar.
Which judge decided [2025] SGHCR 23?
[2025] SGHCR 23 was delivered by Perry Peh in the High Court Registrar on 18 July 2025. The case concerned Civil Procedure.
What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHCR 23 cite?
[2025] SGHCR 23 cites 21 prior decisions, including 2 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Companies Act, Supreme Court of Judicature Act. The decision has itself been cited by 1 subsequent judgment.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (21)
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 23)