Originally from Enforcement of Money Judgments

I.  PRESENT ATTITUDE TOWARD ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN MONEY JUDGMENTS

A. Describe the receptiveness of your government (including courts) toward enforcement of foreign money judgments.

The Singapore government and the courts are generally receptive of enforcement of foreign money judgments. In 1959, when the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Bill was read the second time in parliament, the then Attorney General, Mr. E.P. Shanks said that “in a trading community such as this, I consider this bill to be a most useful and progressive step.”

On 2 September 2019, in the Second Reading Speech by Senior Minister of State for Law, Mr. Edwin Tong SC on The Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgements (Amendment) Bill said that “Singapore actively participates in and supports the development of appropriate multilateral frameworks for the enforcement of judgments, awards and settlements resulting from international dispute resolution.”

In recent reported decisions emanating from Singapore courts, it can be said that the Singapore courts are generally receptive towards enforcement of foreign judgments. See answer to I.B below.

B. Briefly describe recent illustrative attempts, whether successful or unsuccessful, to enforce a foreign money judgment in your country, particularly with regard to enforcement of any judgments from United States courts.

In Hong Pian Tee v. Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc. [2002] SGCA 18, the Court of Appeal, when considering a challenge against the enforcement of a foreign money judgment, upheld the enforcement and stated that as a rule, no court of one jurisdiction should pass judgment on an issue already decided upon by a competent court of another jurisdiction. In the case, the defendant’s challenge to the enforcement in Singapore of a Canadian judgment against him on the grounds of fraud failed before the Singapore Court of Appeal in the absence of fresh evidence of fraud.