SINGAPORE Law and Practice Contributed by: Jansen Chow and Ang Leong Hao, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP
common law. It includes, for example, situations where a director misappropriates the company’s money or opportunities, or receives bribes or benefits at the expense of the company. 4. Overseas Parties in Fraud Claims 4.1 Joining Overseas Parties to Fraud Claims In order to bring a claim against overseas par - ties, it must be established that the Singapore court has jurisdiction over the overseas parties or is the appropriate court to hear the action. Whether or not the Singapore courts assume extraterritorial jurisdiction will depend on the nature of the specific issue at hand. The Singa - pore Court of Appeal has held that the Singapore courts do not have jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters concerning immovable property located outside Singapore. In a separate case, it was held that the Singapore courts can order a for - eign individual to be subject to examination of judgment debtor proceedings if the foreign indi - vidual is so closely connected to the substantive claim that the Singapore court is justified in tak - ing jurisdiction over them. 4.2 Service of Proceedings out of the Jurisdiction Pursuant to the Rules of Court 2021, to establish that the Singapore court has jurisdiction over the overseas parties or is the appropriate court to hear the action, the claimant needs to show that (Order 8 Rule 1(2)): • there is a good arguable case that there is sufficient nexus to Singapore; • Singapore is the forum conveniens (proper forum); and
• there is a serious question to be tried on the merits of the claim. Specifically, under paragraph 63(3) of the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021, the claimant should refer to any of the non-exhaus - tive list of factors to show that there is a good arguable case that there is sufficient nexus to Singapore. As for the requirement of forum conveniens, the claimant may refer to a non-exhaustive list of factors under common law (the Spiliada factors) to show that Singapore is the proper forum for the trial of the claim. Some of the factors include: • the governing law of the contract; • where parties were incorporated; and • the location of witnesses. The court’s approval is not required if service out of Singapore is contractually allowed between the parties (Order 8 Rule 1(3)). In the event that the court’s approval is granted and the claimant is faced with a difficult defend - ant, the claimant may apply for substituted ser - vice (paragraph 65 of the Supreme Court Prac - tice Directions 2021). To do so, two reasonable attempts must first be made at personal service (paragraph 65(2)). Modes of substituted service include AR registered post or electronic means such as email or internet transmission (para - graph 65(3)).
5. Enforcement 5.1 Methods of Enforcement
After a judgment is issued, the recovery of lost assets may still be frustrated as the fraudster may undertake efforts to make enforcement of
307 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook