Ow Chor Seng v Coutts Bank (Schweiz) AG [2002] 4 SLR 948
High Court - Suit No 1783 of 1999 (Registrar’s Appeal No 600195 of 2001)
Lee Seiu Kin JC
8 January, 28 February 2002

Judgment and orders — Judgment upon admissions of fact — Whether there is clear admission of fact entitling other party to enter judgment based on those admissions — Rules of Court O 27 r 3

Harpreet Singh Nehal for the plaintiff/respondent
Lionel Tay for the defendant/appellant

This is an appeal against the decision of the senior assistant registrar in which he dismissed the application of the defendant bank for judgment against the plaintiff, Ow, under the counterclaim pursuant to O 27 r 3. The bank had counterclaimed against Ow for the repayment of the outstanding balances and interest in a facility. The bank applied for judgment on the basis that Ow had admitted that he was liable to the bank for the amount he had used to discharge an overdraft facility.

Held, dismissing the appeal:

Order 27 r 3 relates to admissions of fact, whether in the pleadings or otherwise. If the liability turns on a question of law or mixed law and fact, admissions of fact alone cannot determine the matter.

Although Ow had admitted to drawing down the sum in question, he had pleaded that the bank was precluded from recovering from him in view of the alleged breaches of the Banking Act and MAS Notices. If he were right on this issue, then he would not be liable. To give judgment for the bank against Ow would determine this issue.

In an application under O 27 r 3, the court would only consider whether there is a clear admission of any fact that would entitle the other party to such judgment as he may be entitled to upon those admissions. The court would not examine the likelihood of success of any pleading — unlike in an application under O 14. Order 27 r 3 is intended to provide an immediate judgment based on clear admission of fact and there is no scope for any consideration of the veracity of the pleadings unless it is clearly untenable.