Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

AHTC asks High Court to add new claims against WP MPs including Pritam Singh, 10 months after case decided

SINGAPORE — The High Court on Monday (Aug 3) heard a rare application to add new causes of action against parties liable for damages suffered by the Workers’ Party-run Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC), almost 10 months after a case on the matter was decided.

Workers’ Party MPs (from left) Pritam Singh, Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim at the Supreme Court in a file photo taken in October 2018.

Workers’ Party MPs (from left) Pritam Singh, Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim at the Supreme Court in a file photo taken in October 2018.

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp

  • AHTC makes rare application to amend statement of claim against WP MPs months after case decided
  • WP MPs said that AHTC is trying to have "second bite of cherry" after reading court decision in favour of PRPTC
  • High Court has reserved decision on latest application

 

SINGAPORE — The High Court on Monday (Aug 3) heard a rare application to add new causes of action against parties liable for damages suffered by the Workers’ Party-run Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC), almost 10 months after a case on the matter was decided.

Many of the proposed amendments aim to extend claims of breaches of duty of skill and care originally made against only Workers’ Party (WP) chairman Sylvia Lim and former party chief Low Thia Khiang to current WP chief Pritam Singh and two other town councillors. After the 2020 General Election (GE), Mr Singh was appointed as Singapore’s first Leader of the Opposition.

AHTC’s lawyers from Shook Lin & Bok, who filed the application on May 18, argued that their proposed new claims are similar to claims made by the other plaintiff, Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council (PRPTC) and should thus be permissible.

But the WP members’ lawyers from Tan Rajah & Cheah objected, stating that the new claims are “entirely new” and — if made out earlier — would have changed the way the WP MPs and town councillors conduct their 17-day trial in October 2018.

Besides, Justice Kannan Ramesh had decided on the case and found parties liable for damages suffered by AHTC and PRPTC in a 329-page written judgement released on Oct 11, 2019, seven months before the current application, they added.

The lawyers also said it is an important consideration that AHTC has not filed any appeal against the judgement, while the defendants and PRPTC did. The appeal is scheduled to be heard at the five-judge Court of Appeal later this month.

Justice Ramesh reserved his judgement on the latest application following a three-hour hearing that took place behind closed doors at the High Court on Monday.

THE COURT CASE

Ms Lim, Mr Low and Mr Singh had been found liable by a high court judge last October in a landmark case investigating misuse of town council funds.

At the time, Justice Ramesh had found that Ms Lim and Mr Low had breached their fiduciary duties in appointing FM Solutions and Services (FMSS) as managing agent of AHTC, failing to act in the town council's best interests and acting for "extraneous purposes".

Mr Singh had not breached his fiduciary duties to AHTC, but he had breached his "duties of skill and care".

The civil suits had been brought against them and five other defendants by PRPTC, which is run by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), and an independent panel acting on behalf of AHTC.

AHTC is asking for claims of S$33.7 million from the defendants, with costs, due to improper payments found by independent accountant firm KPMG.

EVENTS LEADING TO THE NEW CLAIMS

The defendants’ submissions revealed that the latest court application was filed about two months after Justice Ramesh raised issues with an AHTC submission during a clarification hearing on March 9 in respect to its draft judgement orders.

At the time, AHTC had made submissions seeking to include orders relating to claims that it did not particularly plead, and Justice Ramesh had asked if that was a correct submission.

“Surely if a cause of action and attendant reliefs are not pleaded, you cannot say that you have established the claim. You cannot just piggyback on PRPTC’s claims,” the judge had said.

“You should have applied to amend your pleadings at the relevant point... The key question is: Have you brought a claim and has the judgement allowed it. If you have not pleaded the claim, you surely cannot ride on PRPTC’s claim. That is a choice you have made.”

While PRPTC’s lawsuit was heard together with AHTC’s, PRPTC was suing the defendants for losses incurred during WP’s administration of Punggol East, a single-member ward that PAP retook after the 2015 GE. PRPTC was represented by Senior Counsel Davinder Singh of Davinder Singh Chambers.

Tan Rajah & Cheah stated in their written submissions filed on July 20 that allowing new claims would “substantially increase” their clients’ liability for damages as PRPTC’s claims were significantly lower than AHTC’s.

AHTC is asking for the S$33.7 million paid to managing agent FMSS and service provider FM Solutions and Integrated Services to be returned, while PRPTC is asking only for part of the sums paid.

NEW CLAIMS AHTC ARE ASKING TO INCLUDE

Under the rules of court, plaintiffs are allowed to ask the court for permission to amend their statements of claim at any stage of the court proceedings, but the Court of Appeal had held that it would be rare for permission to be granted for amendments to be made post-judgement.

AHTC’s proposed additions to the statement of claim include:

  • Mr Low and Ms Lim failed to exercise proper scrutiny in causing AHTC to improperly waive the tender for the contract to provide essential maintenance service unit (EMSU) services in 2011 and awarding it to FMSS.
  • Mr Singh and town councillors — Mr David Chua Zhi Hon and Mr Kenneth Foo, who ran as a candidate in the 2020 GE at East Coast Group Representation Constituency — failed to exercise proper scrutiny in causing AHTC to improperly waive the tender for the appointment of FMSS as managing agent.
  • Mr Singh, Mr Chua and Mr Foo failed to exercise proper scrutiny in causing AHTC to improperly waive the tender for the 2011 EMSU contract and awarding it to FMSS.
  • Mr Singh, Mr Chua and Mr Foo contributed to “control failures” in the payment process, as conflicted persons were allowed to certify work done and approve payments to themselves.
  • Mr Singh, Mr Chua and Mr Foo failed to enquire into facts and circumstances that could have highlighted or set right the alleged control failures or breaches of duties.

These new claims were supported by an affidavit by Senior Counsel Philip Jeyaretnam, who chairs the independent panel appointed and authorised by AHTC to initiate legal action against its own town councillors.

DEFENDANTS’ CASE

In making out the WP MPs’ case opposing the application, Tan Rajah & Cheah lawyers said that the application is “a blatant attempt” to benefit from the findings in the judgement in relation to PRPTC’s lawsuit.

Adding that the new claims will “prejudice” their clients, they said that Ms Lim and Mr Low would be potentially liable for an additional sum of S$583,641, which was paid under the EMSU contract concerned, if the new claims were allowed.

And Mr Singh, Mr Chua and Mr Foo would be looking at a 12-fold increase in damages, from a claim of S$2.79 million to S$33.7 million, they pointed out.

The lawyers further argued that AHTC’s proposed amendments are “not corrections intended to make explicit what was implicit” and are “completely new claims which had not been made before”.

Another implication was an “irremediable” prejudice suffered as their clients would have conducted their defence differently if the claims had been made at the outset, they said.

In particular, Mr Singh, Mr Chua and Mr Foo would have presented additional evidence to show the extent of their knowledge and involvement in the managing agent and EMSU contracts, they said.

“AHTC should not be allowed to have a second bite at the cherry by amending its pleadings to suit the judgement,” they concluded. “This undermines the rule that parties are bound by their pleadings and is an abuse of process of the court.”

Related topics

AHTC Workers' Party Silvia Lim Pritam Singh Low Thia Khiang

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to our newsletter for the top features, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.