Part IV: Interlocutory Applications
36. Distribution of applications37. Filing of summonses
- All interlocutory applications to be made by summons
- "Ex parte"" and “by consent” summonses37A. Filing of Distinct Applications in Separate Summonses37B. Summary Table for Applications for Further and Better Particulars, Discovery, Production of Documents or Interrogatories38. Summonses to be heard in open Court39. Summonses for directions40. Transfer of proceedings to the State Courts41. Ex parte applications for injunctions42. Mareva injunctions and search orders
- Applications for search orders42A. Documents in support of ex parte applications for injunctions (including Mareva injunctions) and search orders43. Applications for discovery or interrogatories against network service providers
All applications in Chambers (including summonses and summonses for directions) shall be filed without specifying whether the application is to be heard before a Judge in person or the Registrar.
All interlocutory applications to be made by summons
(1) The former Form 10 of Appendix A of the Rules of Court (Notice of Motion) has been deleted with effect from 1 January 2006. All interlocutory applications are to be made by way of summons.
“Ex parte” and “by consent” summonses
(2) Ordinary summonses shall be endorsed “ex parte”, or “by consent”, and when so endorsed must bear a certificate to that effect signed by all the solicitors concerned. Any summons that is not so endorsed will be regarded as a contentious matter liable to exceed a hearing duration of 10 minutes.
(3) After the filing of any “ex parte” or “by consent” summons, the application will be examined by the Judge or Registrar as the case may be. If he is satisfied that the application is in order and all other requirements have been complied with, he may make the order(s) applied for on the day fixed for the hearing of the application without the attendance of the applicant or his solicitor.
(4) Summonses that are filed using the Electronic Filing Service will be routed to the inbox of the applicant solicitor’s Electronic Filing Service account. Where the summons is filed through the service bureau, it may be collected at the service bureau. Enquiries by telephone will not be entertained.
(1) Where a party intends to make more than one distinct substantive application in a cause or matter, he must file each application in a separate summons. Distinct applications should not be combined in a single summons, unless they are inextricably or closely linked, or involve overlapping or substantially similar issues. For example, it can be envisaged that applications for:
(a) extension or abridgment of time;(b) amendment of pleadings, summons, etc.; and(c) costs may be closely linked to other more substantive applications.
(2) In addition, applications should not contain alternative prayers when the alternative prayers sought in effect amount to distinct applications. For example, a party should not make an application for further and better particulars on particular issues, and in the alternative, interrogatories on different issues. In such a case, separate summonses should be filed. In contrast, the following is an example of alternative prayer which may be permitted:
In the defendant’s summons setting out a prayer for the striking out of certain paragraphs of the Statement of Claim, the defendant may include an alternative prayer for the plaintiff to be ordered to amend those paragraphs of the Statement of Claim.
(3) Any summons that is not in compliance with this paragraph may be rejected by the Legal Registry of the Supreme Court. The Court may also direct the party to file separate summonses before proceeding with the hearing or proceed with the hearing on the solicitor’s undertaking to file further summonses for the distinct applications.
(1) Unless otherwise directed, this paragraph applies to any application made for an order under Order 18, Rule 12, Order 24, Rule 1, 5, 6, 11 or 12, Order 26, Rule 1 or Order 26A, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court, where:
(a) more than 5 categories or sub-categories of particulars, documents or interrogatories are sought, or the parties agree that this paragraph applies to the application; and(b) the application is contested.
The Court may also direct that this paragraph applies to any other application.
(2) With a view to enhancing the efficacy of an oral hearing, the parties must complete the summary table in Form 5 in Appendix A of these Practice Directions (the “Summary Table”), in lieu of filing written submissions. In exceptional circumstances (e.g. where there are novel issues to be determined), the parties may seek leave of the Court to file written submissions in addition to the Summary Table.
(3) Unless otherwise directed by the Court, the parties must complete the Summary Table in the following manner:
(a) The applicant must complete Columns A and B of the Summary Table, and serve the Summary Table on the respondent, when filing the application. The applicant may also complete Column C of the Summary Table before the applicant serves the Summary Table on the respondent under this sub-paragraph.(b) If the applicant did not complete Column C of the Summary Table when the application was filed, the applicant must complete Column C of the Summary Table, and serve the Summary Table with Column C completed on the respondent, no later than 8 working days before the date of the hearing.(c) The respondent must complete Column D of the Summary Table, and serve the Summary Table with Column D completed on the applicant, within 3 working days after receiving from the applicant the Summary Table with Column C completed.(d) The applicant must complete Column E of the Summary Table, serve on the respondent the completed Summary Table, and file the completed Summary Table using the Electronic Filing Service as an “Other Hearing Related request”, within 3 working days after receiving from the respondent the Summary Table with Column D completed and, in any event, no later than 2 working days before the date of the hearing.
(4) Where a party wishes to adduce any evidence for the purposes of the application, or the Court grants a party leave to file written submissions in addition to the Summary Table:
(a) the Court may adjust the timelines mentioned in sub-paragraph (3); and(b) the party must file and serve the party’s affidavit or written submissions (as the case may be) in accordance with the timelines directed by the Court.
(1) Order 32, Rule 11 of the Rules of Court provides that all summonses shall be heard in Chambers, subject to any provisions in the Rules of Court, written law, directions by the Court and practice directions issued by the Registrar.
(2) An application for the committal of any person to prison for contempt in relation to the winding up of a company (Rule 5(1)(d) of the Companies (Winding Up) Rules), in relation to the winding up of a limited liability partnership (Rule 5(1)(d) of the Limited Liability Partnerships (Winding Up) Rules) or in relation to the winding up of a variable capital company (Rule 6(1)(e) of the Variable Capital Companies (Winding Up) Rules 2020) is an example of an application to be heard in open court pursuant to written law.
(3) In addition to any provisions in the Rules of Court or other written law, and subject to further directions made by the Court, the Registrar hereby directs that the following applications by summons shall be heard in open Court:
(a) applications for mandatory orders, prohibiting orders or quashing orders under Order 53, Rule 2;(b) issuance of summonses for order for review of detention under Order 54, Rule 2;(c) applications to the Court of Appeal in appeals under Order 57, Rule 16 and applications to the Appellate Division in appeals under Order 56A, Rule 17;(d) applications for remedies where property protected by a caveat is arrested under Order 70, Rule 6;(e) applications for orders for damages caused by caveats against the release of property under arrest under Order 70, Rule 13;(f) applications for judgment for failure to file a preliminary act under Order 70, Rule 18;(g) applications for judgment by default under Order 70, Rule 20;(h) applications for orders of priority of claims against the proceeds of sale of a ship under Order70, Rule 21;(i) applications in a pending action for apportionment of salvage under Order 70, Rule 32;(j) applications for objections to a decision on a reference under Order 70, Rule 42;(k) applications under the Patents Act 1994 under Order 87A, Rule 11(6);(l) applications for Judicial Service Officers, Legal Service Officers or non-practising solicitors to be struck off the roll under section 82A(10) of the Legal Profession Act 1966;(m) [deleted](n) applications for the committal of a person to prison for contempt in relation to the winding up of a company under section 124 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 ; and(o) applications to rectify the register of members of a company under section 152 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018.
(1) The principal intention of the summons for directions is to ensure that there is a thorough stocktaking of the issues in an action and the manner in which the evidence should be presented at a trial, with a view to shortening the length of the trial and saving costs generally.
(2) Parties should have completed their discovery of documents by the time of the first hearing of the summons for directions. There should be full discovery on either side.
(3) Parties should also make all interlocutory applications at the hearing of the summons for directions.
Where a claim in the General Division which may have initially exceeded $250,000 is subsequently reduced below this amount, solicitors should bring this to the attention of the Registrar and apply by summons or at the hearing of the summons for directions for an order that the action be transferred to a State Court for trial under section 54C of the State Courts Act 1970, which provides:
General power to transfer from General Division of High Court to State Courts54C. — (1) A party to any civil proceedings pending in the General Division of the High Court may for any suﬃcient reason at any time apply to the General Division of the High Court for an order that the proceedings be transferred to a State Court.(2) Subject to subsection (3), the General Division of the High Court may, if it thinks ﬁt, and on such terms as it sees ﬁt, and either on its own motion or on application, order that the proceedings be transferred accordingly notwithstanding any other provision of this Act.(3) An order under subsection (2) may only be made in respect of such proceedings as could have been commenced in the State Court to which the application relates, if the value of the claim had been within the District Court limit or the Magistrate’s Court limit, as the case may be.Explanation — The fact that the proceedings fall within the civil jurisdiction of the State Courts would not, by itself, ordinarily constitute suﬃcient reason for transferring the proceedings to the State Courts, if enforcement overseas is intended of any judgment obtained in the General Division of the High Court under any enforcement arrangements currently in force.
(1) Order 29, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court provides that an application for the grant of an injunction may be made ex parte in cases of urgency. However, the cases of Castle Fitness Consultancy Pte Ltd v Manz  SLR 896 and The ‘Nagasaki Spirit’ (No 1)  1 SLR 434 take the position that an opponent to an ex parte application, especially where the application seeks injunctive relief, should be invited to attend at the hearing of the application.
(2) In view of this, any party applying ex parte for an injunction (including a Mareva injunction) must give notice of the application to the other concerned parties prior to the hearing. The notice may be given by way of facsimile transmission or telex, or, in cases of extreme urgency, orally by telephone. Except in cases of extreme urgency or with the leave of the Court, the party shall give a minimum of two hours’ notice to the other parties before the hearing. The notice should inform the other parties of the date, time and place fixed for the hearing of the application and the nature of the relief sought. If possible, a copy of the originating process, the ex parte summons and supporting affidavit(s) should be given to each of the other parties in draft form as soon as they are ready to be filed in Court. At the hearing of the ex parte application, in the event that some or all of the other parties are not present or represented, the applicant’s solicitors should inform the Court of:
(a) the attempts that were made to notify the other parties or their solicitors of the making of the application; and(b) what documents were given to the other parties or their solicitors and when these documents were given; and(c) whether the other parties or their solicitors consent to the application being heard without their presence.
(3) The directions set out in sub-paragraph (2) need not be followed if the giving of the notice to the other parties, or some of them, would or might defeat the purpose of the ex parte application. However, in such cases, the reasons for not following the directions should be clearly set out in the affidavit prepared in support of the ex parte application.
(1) Pursuant to Order 32, Rule 9 of the Rules of Court, the Honourable the Chief Justice has directed that applications for Mareva injunctions and for search orders, whether made on an ex parte or inter partes basis, should be heard by a Judge in person. For the avoidance of doubt, all other ex parte applications for interim injunctions may be heard by a Registrar.
(2) Applicants for Mareva injunctions and search orders are required to prepare their orders in accordance with the following forms in Appendix A of these Practice Directions:
(a) Form 6: Search order;(b) Form 7: worldwide Mareva injunction; and(c) Form 8: Mareva injunction limited to assets within the jurisdiction.
When composing the summons electronic form online through the Electronic Filing Service, these Forms shall be prepared in Portable Document Format (PDF) and attached to the summons electronic form.
(3) The language and layout of the forms are intended to make it easier for persons served with these orders to understand what they mean. These forms of orders should be used save to the extent that the Judge hearing a particular application considers there is a good reason for adopting a different form. Any departure from the terms of the prescribed forms should be justified by the applicant in his supporting affidavit(s).
(4) The applicant should undertake not to inform any third party of the proceedings until after the return date.
(5) Wherever practicable, applications should be made sufficiently early so as to ensure that the Judge has sufficient time to read and consider the application in advance.
(6) On an ex parte application for either a Mareva injunction or a search order, an applicant may be required, in an appropriate case, to support his cross-undertaking in damages by a payment to be made into Court, a bond to be issued by an insurance company with a place of business within Singapore, a written guarantee to be issued from a bank with a place of business within Singapore or a payment to the applicant’s solicitor to be held by the solicitor as an officer of the Court pending further order.
Applications for search orders
(7) It was suggested in Universal Thermosensors Ltd v Hibben  1 WLR 840 at 861 that the order be served by a supervising solicitor and carried out in his presence and under his supervision.
(a) The supervising solicitor should be an experienced solicitor who is not a member or employee of the firm acting for the applicant and who has some familiarity with the operation of search orders. The evidence in support of the application should include the identity and experience of the proposed supervising solicitor. These guidelines are equally applicable in the local context and the Judge in his discretion may, in appropriate cases, require a supervising solicitor.(b) Where the premises are likely to be occupied by an unaccompanied woman, at least one of the persons attending on the service of the order should be a woman.(c) Where the nature of the items removed under the order makes this appropriate, the applicant will be required to insure them.
(1) Without prejudice to the requirements stated in Paragraphs 41 and 42 of these Practice Directions, in order to assist the Court hearing ex parte applications for injunctions (including Mareva injunctions) and search orders, an applicant must include in the affidavit prepared in support of the application the following information under clearly defined headings:
(a) Reason(s) the application is taken out on an ex parte basis, including whether the applicant believes that there is a risk of dissipation of assets, destruction of evidence or any other prejudicial conduct;(b) Urgency of the application (if applicable), including whether there is any particular event that may trigger the dissipation of assets, destruction of evidence or any other prejudicial conduct;(c) Factual basis for the application, including the basis of any belief that there will be dissipation of assets, destruction of evidence or any other prejudicial conduct, whether there have been any past incidents of the opponent dissipating assets, destroying evidence or engaging in any other prejudicial conduct, and whether there is any evidence of dishonesty or bad faith of the opponent;(d) Factual basis for any reasonable defences that may be relied on by the opponent;(e) Whether the applicant is aware of any issues relating to jurisdiction, forum non conveniens or service out of jurisdiction, and if so, whether any application relating to these issues has been or will be made;(f) An undertaking to pay for losses that may be caused to the opponent or other persons by the granting of the orders sought, stating what assets are available to meet that undertaking and to whom the assets belong; and(g) Any other material facts which the Court should be aware of.
(2) An applicant must prepare skeletal submissions on the points to be raised at the hearing of the ex parte application. At the hearing, the applicant shall give a copy of the skeletal submissions to the Court and to any opponent present. As soon as possible after the hearing, the applicant shall file the skeletal submissions in Court.
(3) The Court may also require the applicant to prepare a note of the hearing setting out the salient points and arguments canvassed before the Court and may order such a note to be served together with the court documents on any opponent who is not present at the hearing or within a reasonable time after the service of the court documents.
(1) This paragraph applies to applications made under Order 24, Rule 6(1) or Order 26A, Rule 1(1) of the Rules of Court:
(a) by an owner or exclusive licensee of copyright material against a network service provider for information relating to the identity of a user of the network service provider's primary network who is alleged to have infringed the copyright in the material in relation to an electronic copy of the material on, or accessible through, the network service provider's primary network; or(b) by the performer of a performance against a network service provider for information relating to the identity of a user of the network service provider’s primary network who is alleged to have made an unauthorised use of the performance in relation to an electronic recording of the material on, or accessible through, the network service provider’s primary network.
(2) An application referred to in sub-paragraph (1) shall be made in Form 4 (originating summons) of Appendix A of the Rules of Court.
(3) If the applicant requires an urgent hearing date, the onus shall lie on the applicant to attend before the Duty Registrar to highlight the nature of the application and to request that the application be fixed for hearing on an urgent basis.
(4) In sub-paragraph (1)(a), the words “electronic copy”, “material”, “network service provider” and “primary network” have the same meanings as in section 193A(1) of the Copyright Act (Cap. 63, 2006 Rev. Ed.).
(5) In sub-paragraph (1)(b), the words “electronic recording”, “network service provider”, “performance” and “primary network” have the same meanings as in section 246(1) of the Copyright Act.