BABBOBOX PTE. LTD. v EPIQ SINGAPORE PTE. LTD.

[2026] SGHC 66 High Court (General Division) 8 April 2026 • HC/OC 640/2024 ( HC/SUM 3515/2025 ) • 22 min read
6 cases cited

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Rules of court — Summary determination of questions of law or construction of documents

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Andre Maniam Delivered

Counsel (14)

Allen & Gledhill LLP Firm Intelleigen Legal LLC Firm JG Law Chambers LLC Firm Lee & Lee LLP Firm Chee Chun Woei Counsel Plaintiff Eugene Lau Counsel Plaintiff Jacintha Gopal Counsel Plaintiff Lai Tze Chang Stanley Counsel Defendant Lim Yong Sheng David Counsel Defendant Linda Shi Peifeng Counsel Defendant Poon Chong Ming Counsel Plaintiff Tan Tee Jim Counsel Plaintiff Tay Yee Wei Justin Counsel Defendant Toh Jia Yi Counsel Defendant

Parties (3)

Babbobox Pte Ltd Plaintiff Epiq Australia Pty Ltd Defendant Epiq Singapore Pte Ltd Defendant

Case Significance

Babbobox Pte Ltd v Epiq Singapore Pte Ltd and another [2026] SGHC 66, decided on 8 April 2026 by Justice Andre Maniam, concerned a summary determination of a question of contractual construction under Order 9 rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2021. Epiq Singapore Pte Ltd and Epiq Australia Pty Ltd applied for a ruling that the term "Source Code" (as defined in the Master Software Development Agreement dated 19 May 2021 between Babbobox and Epiq Singapore) formed part of the "Work Product" under Section 9.1 of that agreement. Had the Epiq Companies succeeded, Babbobox's claims would have been dismissed in their entirety and an interim injunction obtained by Babbobox on 15 August 2024 would have been discharged — with Babbobox potentially liable on its undertaking as to damages.

Summary

Babbobox Pte Ltd and the Epiq Companies were in dispute over ownership of source codes developed under a Master Software Development Agreement, with the Epiq Companies applying for summary determination under Order 9 rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2021 of whether "Source Code" formed part of the contractually defined "Work Product." The court found that resolving the question required factual inquiries — including whether source codes were incorporated into the relevant platforms and whether ownership was necessary for use — which could not safely be determined as a pure question of law or construction. The application for summary determination was declined and dismissed.

What contractual question did the High Court determine in Babbobox v Epiq Singapore [2026] SGHC 66?

Justice Andre Maniam determined under Order 9 rule 19 whether "Source Code" in the Master Software Development Agreement of 19 May 2021 formed part of "Work Product" under Section 9.1. An affirmative ruling would have dismissed Babbobox's claims and discharged the interim injunction granted on 15 August 2024.

Cases Cited (6)

SLR (6)
[1991] 2 SLR(R) 982 [2016] 2 SLR 50 [2016] 2 SLR 597 [2018] 1 SLR 108 [2020] 4 SLR 1265 [2021] 4 SLR 935

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC 66)