PACIFIC HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS LTD & Anor v PRECIOUS SURGERY CENTRE PTE. LTD. & Anor

[2026] SGHCR 25 High Court Registrar 16 July 2026 HC/S 14/2022 ( HC/SUM 2055/2025 ) · HC/S 12/2022 ( HC/SUM 2053/2025 ) 33 min read
17 cases cited (13 SG, 4 foreign)

Key facts

Court High Court Registrar
Decided
Judge Lim Sai Nei
Charges / claim Civil Procedure
Counsel LVM Law Chambers LLC, NLC Law Asia LLC, Lim Ting Xuan Lynette, Monisha Cheong, Noel Lim Xue Jing, Rezvana Fairouse d/o Mazhardeen, Tan Jinwen, Mark

Source: [2026] SGHCR 25, High Court Registrar, decided — eLitigation. Updated .

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Lim Sai Nei Delivered

Counsel (7)

LVM Law Chambers LLC Firm NLC Law Asia LLC Firm
Lim Ting Xuan Lynette Counsel for the defendant
Monisha Cheong Counsel for the defendant
Noel Lim Xue Jing Counsel for the defendant
Rezvana Fairouse d/o Mazhardeen Counsel for the plaintiff Tan Jinwen, Mark Counsel for the plaintiff

Parties (7)

Entrust Healthcare Pte Ltd Defendant
Pacific Healthcare Holdings Ltd Plaintiff
Pacific Healthcare Specialist Services Pte Ltd Plaintiff
Precious Medical Centre Pte Ltd Defendant
Precious Specialist Centre Pte Ltd Defendant
Precious Surgery Centre Pte Ltd Defendant
Chong Lai Leong William Defendant

Case Significance

Pacific Healthcare Holdings Ltd and another v Precious Surgery Centre Pte Ltd and another and another suit [2026] SGHCR 25 was decided by AR Lim Sai Nei in the General Division of the High Court on 16 July 2026. The plaintiffs sought to amend their statements of claim in Suit 12 (SUM 2053) and Suit 14 (SUM 2055), two of four related suits concerning agreements with the Precious group of companies. The issue was whether the amendments should be allowed under the three-stage framework in Wang Piao. SUM 2053 was dismissed because the proposed amendments were legally unsustainable, with costs of $4,000 against the Suit 12 plaintiffs. SUM 2055 was partially allowed: the third to sixth sets of amendments were permitted, and costs of $8,000 were ordered against Pacific Healthcare Holdings Ltd.

[2026] SGHCR 25 explained

PACIFIC HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS LTD & Anor v PRECIOUS SURGERY CENTRE PTE. LTD. & Anor ([2026] SGHCR 25) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court Registrar on 16 July 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] SGHCR 25 about?

PACIFIC HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS LTD & Anor v PRECIOUS SURGERY CENTRE PTE. LTD. & Anor ([2026] SGHCR 25) is a High Court Registrar decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Amendment of pleadings”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2026] SGHCR 25 consider?

The judgment refers to Limitation Act (Cap 163). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

Summary

The General Division of the High Court gave grounds of decision on applications by Pacific Healthcare Holdings Ltd and related plaintiffs to amend their statements of claim in related suits against the Precious group of companies. The AR dismissed SUM 2053 in Suit 12, finding the proposed amendments legally unsustainable, and ordered costs of $4,000. In SUM 2055 in Suit 14, the third to sixth sets of amendments were allowed, the first, second and seventh were disallowed, and costs of $8,000 were ordered against the plaintiff.

What was Pacific Healthcare Holdings v Precious Surgery Centre [2026] SGHCR 25 about?

It concerned applications to amend statements of claim in related suits brought by Pacific Healthcare Holdings Ltd and its related entities against Precious group companies, decided under the Wang Piao three-stage framework for amendment of pleadings.

What did the AR decide on SUM 2053 and SUM 2055 in [2026] SGHCR 25?

SUM 2053 was dismissed with costs of $4,000. SUM 2055 was partially allowed: the third to sixth sets of amendments were allowed, the first, second and seventh were disallowed, and costs of $8,000 were ordered against the plaintiff.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (17)

SG (1)
[2011] SGHC 196
SLR (12)
[1992] 3 SLR(R) 940 [1993] 3 SLR(R) 640 [2009] 4 SLR(R) 43 [2010] 1 SLR 52 [2015] 5 SLR 962 [2016] 2 SLR 1 [2017] 3 SLR 559 [2021] 5 SLR 1213 [2022] 1 SLR 136 [2024] 4 SLR 540 [2025] 1 SLR 1083 [2025] 3 SLR 235
UK (4)
[1962] 1 QB 583 [1965] 1 QB 232 [1992] 3 All ER 132 [1999] 1 All ER 400

Related cases

Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2026] SGHCR 25)