21.01.2015 Views

View Article - Singapore Academy of Law

View Article - Singapore Academy of Law

View Article - Singapore Academy of Law

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

286<br />

<strong>Singapore</strong> <strong>Academy</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Law</strong> Journal (2003)<br />

differing views in two High Court decisions, in this regard—at Section 6.4.3<br />

below)<br />

6.3 If the civil suit and the ancillary matters need not be<br />

heard by the same court<br />

182 If, after considering all the factors set out in Section 6.1(a)-(d)<br />

above, it appears that the civil suit and the ancillary matters need not be<br />

heard by the same court, then the two suits may either proceed<br />

concurrently, or one set <strong>of</strong> proceedings may be stayed until the other is<br />

disposed <strong>of</strong>.<br />

183 An example <strong>of</strong> where the latter has been done is the case <strong>of</strong> Tian<br />

Ah Poon (m.w.) v Teo Guan Seng and Anor. 112 The wife in this case had<br />

filed a divorce petition on 22 February 2001. A decree nisi was granted<br />

on 23 April 2002, and the ancillary matters were adjourned to be heard<br />

later. On 9 April 2002, the wife, a shareholder in a company <strong>of</strong> which the<br />

husband was a director and shareholder, commenced an action in the<br />

High Court (in OS 488 <strong>of</strong> 2002) under Section 216 (Personal remedies in<br />

cases <strong>of</strong> oppression or injustice) <strong>of</strong> the Companies Act (Cap. 50) against<br />

the company itself, the husband (who was a director and shareholder <strong>of</strong><br />

the company), and other directors and shareholders <strong>of</strong> the company (5<br />

defendants in all). The wife alleged that the husband had deliberately<br />

increased his shareholding in the company to dilute her interest in the<br />

same, and prayed for, inter alia, an order that the husband purchase all<br />

the shares owned by the wife at a fair value to be determined by the court<br />

or by an independent valuer. The wife then applied to transfer the<br />

divorce proceedings to the High Court and have it consolidated with OS<br />

488 <strong>of</strong> 2002. The High Court did not make the order for transfer and<br />

consolidation, but instead ordered that the ancillary matters in the Family<br />

Court be stayed pending the final determination (and any appeal<br />

therefrom) <strong>of</strong> the High Court suit. 113<br />

184 Generally, if a party starts a civil suit in connection with the 3 rd<br />

party issue (either before or after the divorce petition is filed), and the<br />

matter is not resolved (or not close to being resolved) before the ancillary<br />

matters are adjourned to chambers for hearing, and there is no<br />

application for the civil suit to also be heard by the Family Court, the<br />

Family Court will, in all probability, adjourn the hearing <strong>of</strong> the ancillary<br />

112 unreported, Divorce Petition No. 600679/2001<br />

113 Order made 24 June 2002. No judgment was written by the High Court in this matter.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!