This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports. |
Ricwil (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Chew Kong Huat and Others
[1999] SGHC 177
Suit 1998/1997
Lim Teong Qwee JC
30 June 1999
1 JUDGMENT:
2 GROUNDS OF
JUDGMENT
3
4
7. At the election of the plaintiffs:-
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 9. Paragraph 10 of the statement of claim states:
13
14 10. Paragraph 11 states:
15 Letter of credit facilities
16
17 Paragraph 7(a) of the defence of Mr Chew and Ms Aw states:
18 Paragraph 5(g) of Sintalow’s defence states:
19
20
21 13. Mr Chew said in his affidavit:
22
23
24 Ricwil’s contracts transferred to Thermosel
25
26
27
28 17. Mr Ding said in his affidavit:
29 The schedule identified all the eight contracts.
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39 25. Paragraph 2 states:
40 Under cross-examination Mr Chew said:
"Q: AB Vol 5-153. Item 3. Para 2. Sentences 1 and 2. Not accurate?(Note: AB Vol 5-152 to 155 contain the minutes of the meeting.) A: Accurate.Q: You did not tell Board D4 was dormant?A: At that time not dormant.Q: (Question repeated).A: Agree told Board D4 was dormant.Q: Agree what you told Board was untrue?A: Don’t agree.(Witness warned.)A: Began since August 1995....Q: AB Vol 5-153. Item 3. Para 3. Accurate?A: Not correct....Q: Sentence 4. Accurate?A: Yes. Accurate." Sentence 4 of para 3 states:
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51 Duct fabricating machine
52
53
54
55
56 38. The particulars under para 10 of the statement of claim state:
57 39. In their defence Mr Chew and Ms Aw allege that:
58
59
"Sintalow Hardware Pte LtdNo 8 Fan Yoong RoadJurong TownSingapore 2262Attention: Mr Johnny ChewManaging DirectorDear SirSUNTEC CITY PROJECTSALES OF PIPEWORK & FITTINGS IN STOREYours faithfully Confirmed and accepted bySigned M S CHAI SignedProject Manager Mr Johnny ChewFor and on behalf of Managing Director Kailay (S) Pte Ltd Sintalow Hardware Pte Ltd"
60
(Note: AB Vol 5-83 is the agreement of 13 December 1995.)A: No.Q: Why not?Q: All items not useful to plaintiff?A: Part. Part can be useful to plaintiff.Q: You considered useful part to plaintiff?A: No.A: Agree.Q: Items useful to plaintiff. Total cost at least $70,000?Q: AB Vol 5-86. Item 73. Cost 0?A: Yes.Q: Worth?A: No knowledge of pumps.Q: Items 82/83?A: No knowledge.Q: AB Vol 5-85. Item 18. Cost 0. Value?A: May cost about $500.Q: December 1995. Kailay still owed money to plaintiff?A: Yes.A: Don’t know.Q: You checked with anybody from plaintiff?A: No."
61 42. Mr Chai Meng Shep said in his affidavit:
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
(a) Letter from Kailay Engineering to DBS Finance.(b) Letter from Kailay Engineering to Ricwil.
69
70
71
72
Quantity : One lot"
73
74
75
76
....
77
78
79
80 57. Mr Wong said in his affidavit:
81
82
83 Kwang Wah Engineering Pte Ltd
84
"Re: SUNTEC CITY P.5 PRE-INSULATION PIPESThis condition will be applied for UIC Woodland Seagate projects.Your attention is appreciated."
85
86
87
88 The defence of Mr Chew and Ms Aw states:
89
90
91 but that:
92
93
94
95
96
97 Conspiracy
98 66. In Quah Kay Tee v Ong & Co Pte Ltd [1997] 1 SLR 390
99
100
101
102 Dated this 30th day of June 1999.
103 LIM TEONG QWEE
104 JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER
Devinder K Rai and Christopher Goh (Harry Elias Partnership) for the plaintiff
Randolph Khoo, Joseph Kan, Brenda Lim and Lim Su-Lynn (Drew & Napier) for the defendants