Capajet Pte. Ltd. v EV Technology Pte. Ltd. & 3 Ors

[2026] SGHC(A) 16 High Court (Appellate Division) 14 May 2026 • AD/OA 2/2026 ( AD/SUM 2/2026 ) |AD/OA 5/2026 • 23 min read
13 cases cited

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (2)

Counsel (9)

Parties (6)

Case Significance

Capajet Pte Ltd v EV Technology Pte Ltd and others [2026] SGHC(A) 16, decided by the Appellate Division of the High Court on 14 May 2026 with Justice Debbie Ong Siew Ling JAD delivering the judgment (sitting with See Kee Oon JAD), addressed permission-to-appeal applications arising from decisions on summary judgment and striking out in HC/OC 834/2024. The underlying action was Capajet Pte Ltd's claim against EV Technology Pte Ltd for sums due under a loan agreement. In a counterclaim, EV Technology Pte Ltd, Kwek Yan Ping, SEV Smart Pte Ltd, and SEV Holding Pte Ltd sued Capajet and six others including Zhao FeiYan, Geoffrey Owen Cassidy, and TG Holdings HK Ltd. The Appellate Division examined whether permission to appeal is required against orders on summary judgment and striking out, consolidating two separate originating applications (AD/OA 2/2026 and AD/OA 5/2026) for that purpose. Capajet and Zhao FeiYan were represented by Narayanan Sreenivasan and Jerrie Tan Qiu Lin of Sreenivasan Chambers LLC and Eugene Thuraisingam Asia LLC; the respondents by Sankar S/O Kailasa Thevar Saminathan and Tessa Low Wen Xin of Sterling Law Corporation.

Summary

Capajet Pte Ltd sued EV Technology Pte Ltd for sums due under a loan agreement, while EV Tech and related parties counterclaimed alleging an unlawful conspiracy against them. The Appellate Division considered applications for permission to appeal against lower court decisions on summary judgment and striking out. The court allowed SUM 2 (procedural application) but dismissed OA 2 and OA 5, refusing permission to appeal the summary judgment and striking-out decisions.

Did the Appellate Division require permission to appeal against summary judgment and striking out orders in Capajet v EV Technology 2026?

In [2026] SGHC(A) 16, Justice Debbie Ong Siew Ling JAD and See Kee Oon JAD of the Appellate Division examined whether permission to appeal is required against orders on summary judgment and striking out, in applications AD/OA 2/2026 and AD/OA 5/2026 arising from Capajet Pte Ltd's loan claim against EV Technology Pte Ltd in HC/OC 834/2024.

What was the loan dispute between Capajet Pte Ltd and EV Technology Pte Ltd in the 2026 Appellate Division case?

Capajet Pte Ltd sued EV Technology Pte Ltd for sums due under a loan agreement in HC/OC 834/2024. EV Technology and related parties Kwek Yan Ping, SEV Smart Pte Ltd, and SEV Holding Pte Ltd counterclaimed against Capajet and six others. The Appellate Division in [2026] SGHC(A) 16 dealt with permission-to-appeal questions from the summary judgment and striking-out decisions in that dispute.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (13)

SG (5)
[2019] SGHC 36 [2021] SGHC 166 [2022] SGHC(A) 16 [2023] SGCA 24 [2024] SGHC 289
SLR (8)
[1992] 1 SLR 884 [2013] 2 SLR 880 [2014] 1 SLR 860 [2015] 2 SLR 54 [2019] 2 SLR 412 [2022] 2 SLR 253 [2024] 1 SLR 419 [2024] 3 SLR 888

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC(A) 16)