TAHNOON PASHA v AVERE MARK HILL & Anor
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Low Siew Ling |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure |
| Counsel | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, TSMP Law Corporation, David Rajeev Menon, Ong Pei Ching, Phoon Wuei, Poh Yuxuan Natalie, Timothy James Chong Wen An |
Source: [2026] SGHC 36, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (7)
Case Significance
[2026] SGHC 36 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 13 February 2026 concerning Civil Procedure, specifically addressing striking out. The judgment was delivered by Low Siew Ling. The case was brought by Tahnoon Pasha (plaintiff) against Chionh Chye Kit and others (defendant). Legal representation was provided by TSMP Law Corporation and Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP. The judgment cites 14 cases (11 Singapore, 3 foreign).
[2026] SGHC 36 explained
TAHNOON PASHA v AVERE MARK HILL & Anor ([2026] SGHC 36) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 13 February 2026. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. 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 [2026] SGHC 36 about?
TAHNOON PASHA v AVERE MARK HILL & Anor ([2026] SGHC 36) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Striking out — Factual unsustainability” and “Civil Procedure — Striking out — No reasonable cause of action — Respondent relying on purported novel issues of law”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Summary
Tahnoon Pasha sued Avere Mark Hill and another in a dispute involving allegations of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty in a business relationship. The court addressed the claims of dishonesty and the appropriate remedies including account of profits and equitable compensation.
What was decided in [2026] SGHC 36?
[2026] SGHC 36 (TAHNOON PASHA v AVERE MARK HILL & Anor) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 13 February 2026 addressing Civil Procedure, specifically striking out. The judgment was delivered by Low Siew Ling.
Who were the parties in TAHNOON PASHA v AVERE MARK HILL & Anor ([2026] SGHC 36)?
The plaintiff in [2026] SGHC 36 was Tahnoon Pasha, and the defendant was Chionh Chye Kit, Hill, Avere Mark. Legal representation included Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP and TSMP Law Corporation. The case was decided on 13 February 2026 in the High Court (General Division).
Which judge decided [2026] SGHC 36?
[2026] SGHC 36 was delivered by Low Siew Ling in the High Court (General Division) on 13 February 2026. The case concerned Civil Procedure.
What cases and statutes does [2026] SGHC 36 cite?
[2026] SGHC 36 cites 14 prior decisions, including 3 from foreign jurisdictions.
Cases Cited (14)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC 36)